scholarly journals Introduction: priority setting, equitable access and public involvement in health care

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 736-750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albert Weale ◽  
Katharina Kieslich ◽  
Peter Littlejohns ◽  
Aviva Tugendhaft ◽  
Emma Tumilty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Priority Setting ◽  
Access To Health Care ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Equitable Access ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Political Values ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Issue Public

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce the special issue on improving equitable access to health care through increased public and patient involvement (PPI) in prioritization decisions by discussing the conceptualization, scope and rationales of PPI in priority setting that inform the special issue. Design/methodology/approach – The paper employs a mixed-methods approach in that it provides a literature review and a conceptual discussion of the common themes emerging in the field of PPI and health priority setting. Findings – The special issue focuses on public participation that is collective in character, in the sense that the participation relates to a social, not personal, decision and is relevant to whole groups of people and not single individuals. It is aimed at influencing a decision on public policy or legal rules. The rationales for public participation can be found in democratic theory, especially as they relate to the social and political values of legitimacy and representation. Originality/value – The paper builds on previous definitions of public participation by underlining its collective character. In doing so, it develops the work by Parry, Moyser and Day by arguing that, in light of the empirical evidence presented in this issue, public participatory activities such as protests and demonstrations should no longer be labelled unconventional, but should instead be labelled as “contestatory participation”. This is to better reflect a situation in which these modes of participation have become more conventional in many parts of the world.

scholarly journals Public involvement in health priority setting: future challenges for policy, research and society

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 796-808 ◽  
Author(s):  
David James Hunter ◽  
Katharina Kieslich ◽  
Peter Littlejohns ◽  
Sophie Staniszewska ◽  
Emma Tumilty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Priority Setting ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Health Priority ◽  
Future Challenges ◽  
The Many

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to reflect on the findings of this special issue and discusses the future challenges for policy, research and society. The findings suggest that challenges emerge as a result of legitimacy deficits of both consensus and contestatory modes of public involvement in health priority setting. Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws on the discussions and findings presented in this special issue. It seeks to bring the country experiences and case studies together to draw conclusions for policy, research and society. Findings – At least two recurring themes emerge. An underlying theme is the importance, but also the challenge, of establishing legitimacy in health priority setting. The country experiences suggest that we understand very little about the conditions under which representative, or authentic, participation generates legitimacy and under which it will be regarded as insufficient. A second observation is that public participation takes a variety of forms that depend on the opportunity structures in a given national context. Given this variety the conceptualization of public participation needs to be expanded to account for the many forms of public participation. Originality/value – The paper concludes that the challenges of public involvement are closely linked to the question of how legitimate processes and decisions can be generated in priority setting. This suggests that future research must focus more narrowly on conditions under which legitimacy are generated in order to expand the understanding of public involvement in health prioritization.

Public participation in health care priority setting: A scoping review

Health Policy ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 91 (3) ◽  
pp. 219-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig Mitton ◽  
Neale Smith ◽  
Stuart Peacock ◽  
Brian Evoy ◽  
Julia Abelson
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Priority Setting ◽  
Health Care Priority Setting

scholarly journals Equitable access to health care

BMJ ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 335 (7625) ◽  
pp. 833-834 ◽  
Author(s):  
James K Tumwine
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Access To Health Care ◽  
Equitable Access ◽  
Access To Health

Impact of restricting access to health care services on Syrian refugees in Jordan: evidence from cross-sectional surveys

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ibraheem Khaled Abu Siam ◽  
María Rubio Gómez
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Access ◽  
Access To Health Care ◽  
Health Care Services ◽  
Health Care Cost ◽  
Syrian Refugees ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Care Access ◽  
Care Services

Purpose Access to health-care services for refugees are always impacted by many factors and strongly associated with population profile, nature of crisis and capacities of hosing countries. Throughout refugee’s crisis, the Jordanian Government has adopted several healthcare access policies to meet the health needs of Syrian refugees while maintaining the stability of the health-care system. The adopted health-care provision policies ranged from enabling to restricting and from affordable to unaffordable. The purpose of this paper is to identify the influence of restricted level of access to essential health services among Syrian refugees in Jordan. Design/methodology/approach This paper used findings of a cross-sectional surveys conducted over urban Syrian refugees in Jordan in 2017 and 2018 over two different health-care access policies. The first were inclusive and affordable, whereas the other considered very restricting policy owing to high inflation in health-care cost. Access indicators from four main thematic areas were selected including maternal health, family planning, child health and monthly access of household. A comparison between both years’ access indicators was conducted to understand access barriers and its impact. Findings The comparison between findings of both surveys shows a sudden shift in health-care access and utilization behaviors with increased barriers level thus increased health vulnerabilities. Additionally, the finding during implementation of restricted access policy proves the tendency among some refugees groups to adopt negative adaptation strategies to reduce health-care cost. The participants shifted to use a fragmented health-care, reduced or delayed care seeking and use drugs irrationally weather by self-medication or reduce drug intake. Originality/value Understanding access barriers to health services and its negative short-term and long-term impact on refugees’ health status as well as the extended risks to the host communities will help states that hosting refugees building rational access policy to protect whole community and save public health gains during and post crisis. Additionally, it will support donors to better mobilize resources according to the needs while the humanitarian actors and service providers will better contribute to the public health stability during refugee’s crisis.

scholarly journals Formal priority setting in health care: the Swedish experience

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 891-907 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Garpenby ◽  
Karin Bäckman
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Priority Setting ◽  
National Level ◽  
Regional Health ◽  
Bottom Up ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Political Conflicts ◽  
Health Authorities ◽  
Financial Pressure ◽  
Regional Health Authorities

Purpose From the late 1980s and onwards health care in Sweden has come under increasing financial pressure, forcing policy makers to consider restrictions. The purpose of this paper is to review experiences and to establish lessons of formal priority setting in four Swedish regional health authorities during the period 2003-2012. Design/methodology/approach This paper draws on a variety of sources, and evidence is organised according to three broad aspects: design and implementation of models and processes, application of evidence and decision analysis tools and decision making and implementation of decisions. Findings The processes accounted for here have resulted in useful experiences concerning technical arrangements as well as political and public strategies. All four sites used a particular model for priority setting that combined top-down- and bottom-up-driven elements. Although the process was authorised from the top it was clearly bottom-up driven and the template followed a professional rationale. New meeting grounds were introduced between politicians and clinical leaders. Overall a limited group of stakeholders were involved. By defusing political conflicts the likelihood that clinical leaders would regard this undertaking as important increased. Originality/value One tendency today is to unburden regional authorities of the hard decisions by introducing arrangements at national level. This study suggests that regional health authorities, in spite of being politically governed organisations, have the potential to execute a formal priority-setting process. Still, to make priority-setting processes more robust to internal as well as external threat remains a challenge.

Supporting older military veterans in the rural US

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 286-297
Author(s):  
Bret Hicken ◽  
Kimber Parry
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Access To Health Care ◽  
Veterans Health ◽  
Health Administration ◽  
Care Needs ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Access To Health ◽  
The Us

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of rural older veterans in the US and discuss how the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is increasing access to health care for older veterans in rural areas. Design/methodology/approach This is a descriptive paper summarizing population and program data about rural veterans. Findings VA provides a variety of health care services and benefits for older veterans to support health, independence, and quality of life. With the creation of the Veterans Health Administration Office of Rural Health (ORH) in 2006, the needs of rural veterans, who are on average older than urban veterans, are receiving greater attention and support. ORH and VA have implemented several programs to specifically improve access to health care for rural veterans and to improve quality of care for older veterans in rural areas. Originality/value This paper is one of the first to describe how VA is addressing the health care needs of older, rural veterans.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document