Modeling Quality Standards with Decision Analysis in Medicine and Public Health

2020 ◽  
pp. 343-359
Author(s):  
Richard G. Cornell
Author(s):  
Sanford V. Berg

Organizations regulating the water sector have major impacts on public health and the sustainability of supply to households, industry, power generation, agriculture, and the environment. Access to affordable water is a human right, but it is costly to produce, as is wastewater treatment. Capital investments required for water supply and sanitation are substantial, and operating costs are significant as well. That means that there are trade-offs among access, affordability, and cost recovery. Political leaders prioritize goals and implement policy through a number of organizations: government ministries, municipalities, sector regulators, health agencies, and environmental regulators. The economic regulators of the water sector set targets and quality standards for water operators and determine prices that promote the financial sustainability of those operators. Their decisions affect drinking water safety and sanitation. In developing countries with large rural populations, centralized water networks may not be feasible. Sector regulators often oversee how local organizations ensure water supply to citizens and address wastewater transport, treatment, and disposal, including non-networked sanitation systems. Both rural and urban situations present challenges for sector regulators. The theoretical rationale for water-sector regulation address operator monopoly power (restricting output) and transparency, so customers have information regarding service quality and operator efficiency. Externalities (like pollution) are especially problematic in the water sector. In addition, water and sanitation enhance community health and personal dignity: they promote cohesion within a community. Regulatory systems attempt to address those issues. Of course, government intervention can actually be problematic if short-term political objectives dominate public policy or rules are established to benefit politically powerful groups. In such situations, the fair and efficient provision of water and sanitation services is not given priority. Note that the governance of economic regulators (their organizational design, values or principles, functions, and processes) creates incentives (and disincentives) for operators to improve performance. Related ministries that provide oversight of the environment, health and safety, urban and housing issues, and water resource management also influence the long-term sustainability of the water sector and associated health impacts. Ministries formulate public policy for those areas under their jurisdiction and monitor its implementation by designated authorities. Ideally, water-sector regulators are somewhat insulated from day-to-day political pressures and have the expertise (and authority) to implement public policy and address emerging sector issues. Many health issues related to water are caused or aggravated by lack of clean water supply or lack of effective sanitation. These problems can be attributed to lack of access or to lack of quality supplied if there is access. The economic regulation of utilities has an effect on public health through the setting of quality standards for water supply and sanitation, the incentives provided for productive efficiency (encouraging least-cost provision of quality services), setting tariffs to provide cash flows to fund supply and network expansion, and providing incentives and monitoring so that investments translate into system expansion and better quality service. Thus, although water-sector regulators tend not to focus directly on health outcomes, their regulatory decisions determine access to safe water and sanitation.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Dowie ◽  
Mette Kjer Kaltoft

UNSTRUCTURED According to researchers drawing on the ideas of Jürgen Habermas, Canadian patients and Danish General Practitioners are experiencing ‘colonisation’ of their ‘lifeworlds’ by ‘the system’, Their suggested remedy is to ensure that the clinical encounter, freed of strategic rationality, re-prioritises Habermasian ‘communicative action’ aimed at mutual understanding. However, Blau shows that such communicative action is, and should be, inextricably interwoven into means-end rationality, when Habermas’ caricature of the latter is rejected. We argue that the decision support framework provided by Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis can help produce the ‘communicative means-end rationality’ essential in a public health service based on role-respecting sincerity and autonomy. No ‘positivistic reduction’ is involved in the technique.


2018 ◽  
pp. 1924-1947
Author(s):  
Androutsou Lorena ◽  
Androutsou Foulvia

Health systems are facing greater demands and challenges. Access to all with high-quality standards has been a key challenge for the European health systems, however, they are engaged to take care of the rights of those in need. This article aims to identify public health areas and values. It offers many opportunities to help policy and decision makers to write “policy briefs” and to clearly outline the rationale for action. It will pursuit to enhance local capacities and skills to plan, implement, evaluate and sustain system improvements. There is a need both at Member State and European levels to support the public health services to shape the future of health and healthcare.


2009 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 39
Author(s):  
Sinan Khan, MPH, MA ◽  
Anke Richter, PhD

Objective: To comply with the Center for Disease Control’s mass prophylaxis mandates, many public health jurisdictions must supplement their existing Points of Dispensing (POD)-based system. Because of limited budgets and personnel availability, only one or two alternatives out of the many potential options can be implemented.Design: Multicriteria decision analysis is a powerful tool that allows public health officials to assess the relative effectiveness of alternate modes of dispensing while incorporating the opinions of their multidisciplinary emergency response planning teams.Setting: This process was utilized to analyze the effectiveness of alternate modes of dispensing that could be used to supplement the existing POD system within the Los Angeles County (LAC) Department of Public Health (DPH).Results: The top two options for LAC were prepositioning for civil service and partnership with a major Health Maintenance Organization. These choices were stable under a variety of sensitivity analyses, and the differences in opinion between the agencies and other stakeholders do not change them.Conclusions: The transparency of the model and analysis may allow decision makers and planners in the LAC DPH to garner support for their alternate modes of dispensing plans. By making the decision criteria clear and demonstrating the robustness of the results in the sensitivity analyses, public health partners gain a deeper understanding of the issues and their potential roles. The process can be repeated by any jurisdiction, but definition of “best” will rely on the issues and gaps that are identified with the jurisdiction’s POD plan for mass prophylaxis.


1984 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara J. McNeil ◽  
Stephen G. Pauker

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (8) ◽  
pp. e211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theresa Devine ◽  
Jordan Broderick ◽  
Linda M Harris ◽  
Huijuan Wu ◽  
Sandra Williams Hilfiker

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document