Too late, too vague, too soft: How and why the idea of the first point of contact in the Icelandic health care system has failed

S. Sigurgeirsdóttir
{"title":"Too late, too vague, too soft: How and why the idea of the first point of contact in the Icelandic health care system has failed","authors":"S. Sigurgeirsdóttir","doi":"10.13177/IRPA.A.2015.11.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research is about ideas, interests and institutions in health care in Iceland. It describes how the idea of primary care centres as the first point of patients´ contact in health care, on one hand, and the idea of patients´ freedom to choose where to seek medical care, on the other, have been the competing views shaping the system for almost fifty years. The research seeks to shed lights on why the authorities have not succeeded in making primary care become the first point of contact in health care. It aims to create a better understanding about why and how such a gap between objectives and outcomes in public policy emerges. This study draws on published and unpublished findings from the author´s earlier research on the Icelandic health care system, and interviews with medical doctors, civil servants and politicians. Theories on policy implementation are applied in order to bring out a theoretical perspective on government´s policy implementation. Furthermore, the research brings out how issues in health care reach government´s agenda and why government´s attempts at change do sometimes succeed, but most often don´t. It concludes that better access to primary care services emphasized by the early 1970s legislation was first and foremost aimed at people living outside the two main urban areas. On the other hand, the idea of patients´ first point of contact as a goal of government policy emerged too late, its aim and implementation was too ambiguous and the tool of government applied too weak.","PeriodicalId":294103,"journal":{"name":"Icelandic Review of Politics and Administration","volume":"323-325 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Icelandic Review of Politics and Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13177/IRPA.A.2015.11.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This research is about ideas, interests and institutions in health care in Iceland. It describes how the idea of primary care centres as the first point of patients´ contact in health care, on one hand, and the idea of patients´ freedom to choose where to seek medical care, on the other, have been the competing views shaping the system for almost fifty years. The research seeks to shed lights on why the authorities have not succeeded in making primary care become the first point of contact in health care. It aims to create a better understanding about why and how such a gap between objectives and outcomes in public policy emerges. This study draws on published and unpublished findings from the author´s earlier research on the Icelandic health care system, and interviews with medical doctors, civil servants and politicians. Theories on policy implementation are applied in order to bring out a theoretical perspective on government´s policy implementation. Furthermore, the research brings out how issues in health care reach government´s agenda and why government´s attempts at change do sometimes succeed, but most often don´t. It concludes that better access to primary care services emphasized by the early 1970s legislation was first and foremost aimed at people living outside the two main urban areas. On the other hand, the idea of patients´ first point of contact as a goal of government policy emerged too late, its aim and implementation was too ambiguous and the tool of government applied too weak.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
太迟,太模糊,太软弱:冰岛医疗保健系统中第一接触点的想法是如何以及为什么失败的
这项研究是关于冰岛医疗保健的理念、利益和机构。它描述了初级保健中心作为患者在医疗保健方面的第一个接触点的想法,以及患者自由选择在哪里寻求医疗服务的想法,是如何在近五十年来形成该系统的相互竞争的观点。这项研究试图阐明为什么当局没有成功地使初级保健成为卫生保健的第一接触点。它旨在更好地理解公共政策的目标和结果之间为何以及如何出现这种差距。这项研究借鉴了作者早期对冰岛卫生保健系统的研究中已发表和未发表的发现,并采访了医生、公务员和政治家。运用政策执行理论,为政府政策执行提供理论视角。此外,该研究还揭示了医疗保健问题是如何进入政府议程的,以及为什么政府试图改变的努力有时会成功,但大多数情况下都不会成功。报告的结论是,20世纪70年代早期立法所强调的更好地获得初级保健服务首先是针对两个主要城市地区以外的人。另一方面,将患者的第一接触点作为政府政策目标的想法出现得太迟,其目标和实施太模糊,政府应用的工具太弱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Word I Hate: Racism, Refugees and Asylum Seekers in Iceland Leadership for experts: First among equals Tourists and municipal finance Young people’s views on political participation The opening of Costco in Iceland: Unexpected meanings of globalized phenomenon
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1