|
|
International Journal of Health Policy and Management، جلد ۷، شماره ۸، صفحات ۷۴۶-۷۵۴
|
|
|
| عنوان فارسی |
|
|
| چکیده فارسی مقاله |
|
|
| کلیدواژه‌های فارسی مقاله |
|
|
| عنوان انگلیسی |
Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage |
|
| چکیده انگلیسی مقاله |
Background As universal health coverage becomes the norm in many countries, it is important to determine public priorities regarding benefits to include in health insurance coverage. We report results of participation in a decision exercise among residents of Switzerland, a high-income country with a long history of universal health insurance and deliberative democracy. Methods We adapted the Choosing Healthplans All Together (CHAT) tool, an exercise developed to transform complex healthcare allocation decisions into easily understandable choices, for use in Switzerland. We conducted CHAT exercises in twelve Swiss cities with recruitment from a range of socio-economic backgrounds, taking into account differences in language and culture. Results Compared to existing coverage, a majority of 175 participants accepted greater general practice gatekeeping (94%), exclusion of invasive life-sustaining measures in dying patients (80%), longer waiting times for non-urgent episodic care (78%), greater adherence to cost-effectiveness guidelines in chronic care (66%), and lower premium subsidies (51%). Most initially chose greater coverage for dental care (59%), quality of life (57%), and long-term care (90%). During group deliberations, participants increased coverage for out-of-pocket costs (58%) and mental health to current levels (41%) and beyond current levels for rehabilitation (50%), and decreased coverage for quality of life to current levels (74%). Following group deliberation, they tended to change their views back to below current coverage for help with out-of-pocket costs, and back to current levels for rehabilitation. Most participants accepted the plan as appropriate and fair. A significant number would have added nothing. Conclusion Swiss participants who have engaged in a priority setting exercise accept complex resource allocation tradeoffs in healthcare coverage. Moreover, in the context of a well-funded healthcare system with universal coverage centered on individual choice, at least some of our participants believed a fully sufficient threshold of health insurance coverage was achieved. |
|
| کلیدواژه‌های انگلیسی مقاله |
|
|
| نویسندگان مقاله |
Samia A. Hurst |
Institute for Ethics, History, and the Humanities, Geneva University Medical
School, Geneva, Switzerland
Mélinée Schindler |
Institute for Ethics, History, and the Humanities, Geneva University Medical
School, Geneva, Switzerland
Susan D. Goold |
Department of General Internal Medicine,
University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Marion Danis |
Department of
Bioethics, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
|
|
| نشانی اینترنتی |
http://www.ijhpm.com/article_3472_3b525fb580779b86a9363bc2fe658bbe.pdf |
| فایل مقاله |
اشکال در دسترسی به فایل - ./files/site1/rds_journals/291/article-291-689458.pdf |
| کد مقاله (doi) |
|
| زبان مقاله منتشر شده |
en |
| موضوعات مقاله منتشر شده |
|
| نوع مقاله منتشر شده |
|
|
|
|
برگشت به:
صفحه اول پایگاه |
نسخه مرتبط |
نشریه مرتبط |
فهرست نشریات
|