首页> 外文期刊>The Milbank quarterly >What are the key ingredients for effective public involvement in health care improvement and policy decisions? A randomized trial process evaluation
【24h】

What are the key ingredients for effective public involvement in health care improvement and policy decisions? A randomized trial process evaluation

机译:有效地使公众有效参与改善医疗保健和政策决策的关键要素是什么?随机试验过程评估

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Context In the past 50 years, individual patient involvement at the clinical consultation level has received considerable attention. More recently, patients and the public have increasingly been involved in collective decisions concerning the improvement of health care and policymaking. However, rigorous evaluation guiding the development and implementation of effective public involvement interventions is lacking. This article describes those key ingredients likely to affect public members' ability to deliberate productively with professionals and influence collective health care choices. Method We conducted a trial process evaluation of public involvement in setting priorities for health care improvement. In all, 172 participants (including 83 patients and public members and 89 professionals) from 6 Health and Social Services Centers in Canada participated in the trial. We videorecorded 14 one-day meetings, and 2 nonparticipant observers took structured notes. Using qualitative analysis, we show how public members influenced health care improvement priorities. Findings Legitimacy, credibility, and power explain the variations in the public members' influence. Their credibility was supported by their personal experience as patients and caregivers, the provision of a structured preparation meeting, and access to population-based data from their community. Legitimacy was fostered by the recruitment of a balanced group of participants and by the public members' opportunities to draw from one another's experience. The combination of small-group deliberations, wider public consultation, and a moderation style focused on effective group process helped level out the power differences between professionals and the public. The engagement of key stakeholders in the intervention design and implementation helped build policy support for public involvement. Conclusions A number of interacting active ingredients structure and foster the public's legitimacy, credibility, and power. By paying greater attention to them, policymakers could develop and implement more effective public involvement interventions.
机译:背景信息在过去的50年中,临床咨询级别的个体患者参与受到了广泛关注。最近,患者和公众越来越多地参与有关改善医疗保健和决策的集体决策。但是,缺乏指导有效的公众参与干预措施的制定和实施的严格评估。本文介绍了可能影响公众成员与专业人士进行富有成效的商议能力并影响集体医疗保健选择的那些关键因素。方法我们进行了一项公众参与的试验过程评估,确定了改善医疗保健的重点。来自加拿大6个健康和社会服务中心的172名参与者(包括83名患者和公共成员以及89名专业人员)参加了该试验。我们录制了14个为期一天的会议的视频,并且有2位非参与者的观察者进行了结构化记录。使用定性分析,我们展示了公众成员如何影响医疗保健改善的重点。调查结果合法性,公信力和权力解释了公众成员影响力的差异。他们作为患者和看护者的个人经历,提供有组织的准备会议以及从社区中获取基于人群的数据的支持,增强了他们的信誉。通过招募均衡的参与者群体和公众成员相互借鉴经验的方式,促进了合法性。小组讨论,更广泛的公众咨询以及专注于有效小组流程的节制风格的结合,有助于消除专业人士和公众之间的权力差异。关键利益相关者参与干预措施的设计和实施有助于为公众参与建立政策支持。结论许多相互作用的有效成分构成并增强了公众的合法性,公信力和力量。通过更加关注他们,政策制定者可以制定和实施更有效的公众参与干预措施。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号