Departamento de Salud Pública, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Centro para la Prevención y Control del Cancer (CECAN) & Departamento de Hemotaologia y Oncología, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Front Public Health. 2024 Jan 8;11:1302640. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1302640. eCollection 2023.
Health systems have committed their path to universal health coverage using health planning to accomplish their goals of efficiency, equity and sustainability. Chile, a high-income country with a public-private mix health system, has made significant progress through several successive health policies implemented in the last 20 years which have been consistent with this approach. However, in the last 5 years, the national congress has produced several disease-specific laws, which have been mainly promoted by the civil society. These laws indicate the actions the health authority must perform to tackle the needs of the affected population, which ultimately determine the priorities of the health system. We argue that this legal pattern has become an alternative path to priority-setting, as opposed to health planning. We claim this "legal path" is a mechanism used by civil society in a context where the health authority fails to implement a robust and legitimate prioritization process. Although these laws have brought benefits to patients suffering the corresponding conditions, we highlight this approach does not guarantee improvements in equity, efficiency and health system performance. Instead, we advocate for taking back the control of the priority-setting based on health planning, through a new institutionalization of health technology assessment and quality of care.
卫生系统通过卫生规划为实现效率、公平和可持续性目标而走上全民健康覆盖的道路。智利是一个高收入的公私混合医疗体系国家,在过去 20 年中实施了几项连续的卫生政策,这些政策一直符合这一方法,因此取得了重大进展。然而,在过去 5 年中,国会制定了几项针对特定疾病的法律,这些法律主要是由民间社会推动的。这些法律指出了卫生当局必须采取的行动,以解决受影响人群的需求,这最终决定了卫生系统的优先事项。我们认为,这种法律模式已经成为一种替代卫生规划的优先事项确定方法。我们声称,这种“法律途径”是民间社会在卫生当局未能实施强有力和合法的优先排序过程的情况下使用的一种机制。尽管这些法律给相应疾病的患者带来了好处,但我们强调这种方法并不能保证公平性、效率和卫生系统绩效的提高。相反,我们主张通过新的卫生技术评估和护理质量的制度化,重新控制基于卫生规划的优先事项制定。