Decentralization of the health system - experiences from Pakistan, Portugal and Brazil.

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Health Research Policy and Systems Pub Date : 2024-05-27 DOI:10.1186/s12961-024-01145-3
Shafaq Mahmood, Rita Sequeira, Muhammad Muneeb Ullah Siddiqui, Marcos Batista Araujo Herkenhoff, Patrícia Pita Ferreira, Adalberto Campos Fernandes, Paulo Sousa
{"title":"Decentralization of the health system - experiences from Pakistan, Portugal and Brazil.","authors":"Shafaq Mahmood, Rita Sequeira, Muhammad Muneeb Ullah Siddiqui, Marcos Batista Araujo Herkenhoff, Patrícia Pita Ferreira, Adalberto Campos Fernandes, Paulo Sousa","doi":"10.1186/s12961-024-01145-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Decentralization of a health system is a complex and multidimensional phenomenon that demands thorough investigation of its process logistics, predisposing factors and implementation mechanisms, within the broader socio-political environment of each nation. Despite its wide adoption across both high-income countries (HICs) and low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), empirical evidence of whether decentralization actually translates into improved health system performance remains inconclusive and controversial. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive description of the decentralization processes in three countries at different stages of their decentralization strategies - Pakistan, Brazil and Portugal.</p><p><strong>Main body: </strong>This study employed a systematic analysis of peer-reviewed academic journals, official government reports, policy documents and publications from international organizations related to health system decentralization. A comprehensive search was conducted using reputable databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar, the WHO repository and other relevant databases, covering the period up to the knowledge cutoff date in June 2023. Information was systematically extracted and organized into the determinants, process mechanics and challenges encountered during the planning, implementation and post-decentralization phases. Although decentralization reforms have achieved some success, challenges persist in their implementation. Comparing all three countries, it was evident that all three have prioritized health in their decentralization reforms and aimed to enhance local decision-making power. Brazil has made significant progress in implementing decentralization reforms, while Portugal and Pakistan are still in the process. Pakistan has faced significant implementation challenges, including capacity-building, resource allocation, resistance to change and inequity in access to care. Brazil and Portugal have also faced challenges, but to a lesser extent. The extent, progress and challenges in the decentralization processes vary among the three countries, each requiring ongoing evaluation and improvement to achieve the desired outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Notable differences exist in the extent of decentralization, the challenges faced during implementation and inequality in access to care between the three countries. It is important for Portugal, Brazil and Pakistan to address these through reinforcing implementation strategies, tackling inequalities in access to care and enhancing monitoring and evaluation mechanism. Additionally, fostering knowledge sharing among these different countries will be instrumental in facilitating mutual learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":12870,"journal":{"name":"Health Research Policy and Systems","volume":"22 1","pages":"61"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11129505/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Research Policy and Systems","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01145-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Decentralization of a health system is a complex and multidimensional phenomenon that demands thorough investigation of its process logistics, predisposing factors and implementation mechanisms, within the broader socio-political environment of each nation. Despite its wide adoption across both high-income countries (HICs) and low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), empirical evidence of whether decentralization actually translates into improved health system performance remains inconclusive and controversial. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive description of the decentralization processes in three countries at different stages of their decentralization strategies - Pakistan, Brazil and Portugal.

Main body: This study employed a systematic analysis of peer-reviewed academic journals, official government reports, policy documents and publications from international organizations related to health system decentralization. A comprehensive search was conducted using reputable databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar, the WHO repository and other relevant databases, covering the period up to the knowledge cutoff date in June 2023. Information was systematically extracted and organized into the determinants, process mechanics and challenges encountered during the planning, implementation and post-decentralization phases. Although decentralization reforms have achieved some success, challenges persist in their implementation. Comparing all three countries, it was evident that all three have prioritized health in their decentralization reforms and aimed to enhance local decision-making power. Brazil has made significant progress in implementing decentralization reforms, while Portugal and Pakistan are still in the process. Pakistan has faced significant implementation challenges, including capacity-building, resource allocation, resistance to change and inequity in access to care. Brazil and Portugal have also faced challenges, but to a lesser extent. The extent, progress and challenges in the decentralization processes vary among the three countries, each requiring ongoing evaluation and improvement to achieve the desired outcomes.

Conclusion: Notable differences exist in the extent of decentralization, the challenges faced during implementation and inequality in access to care between the three countries. It is important for Portugal, Brazil and Pakistan to address these through reinforcing implementation strategies, tackling inequalities in access to care and enhancing monitoring and evaluation mechanism. Additionally, fostering knowledge sharing among these different countries will be instrumental in facilitating mutual learning.

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
卫生系统的权力下放--巴基斯坦、葡萄牙和巴西的经验。
背景:卫生系统的权力下放是一个复杂而多维的现象,需要在每个国家更广泛的社会政治环境中对其过程物流、诱因和实施机制进行深入调查。尽管权力下放在高收入国家(HICs)和中低收入国家(LMICs)中被广泛采用,但关于权力下放是否能切实改善卫生系统绩效的经验证据仍不确定且存在争议。本文旨在全面描述巴基斯坦、巴西和葡萄牙这三个处于权力下放战略不同阶段的国家的权力下放进程:本研究对同行评审的学术期刊、官方政府报告、政策文件以及国际组织有关卫生系统权力下放的出版物进行了系统分析。利用 PubMed、Google Scholar、世卫组织资料库和其他相关数据库等知名数据库进行了全面搜索,搜索时间截至 2023 年 6 月知识截止日。对信息进行了系统提取,并按规划、实施和权力下放后阶段的决定因素、过程机制和遇到的挑战进行了整理。尽管非集中化改革取得了一些成功,但在实施过程中仍面临挑战。通过对这三个国家进行比较,可以明显看出,这三个国家都在其权力下放改革中优先考虑了卫生问题,并以加强地方决策权为目标。巴西在实施权力下放改革方面取得了重大进展,而葡萄牙和巴基斯坦仍在进程中。巴基斯坦在实施过程中面临重大挑战,包括能力建设、资源分配、改革阻力和获得医疗服务方面的不平等。巴西和葡萄牙也面临挑战,但程度较轻。这三个国家在权力下放进程中的程度、进展和挑战各不相同,每个国家都需要不断进行评估和改进,以实现预期成果:结论:三个国家在权力下放的程度、实施过程中面临的挑战以及获得医疗服务的不平等方面存在显著差异。葡萄牙、巴西和巴基斯坦必须通过加强实施战略、解决获得医疗服务方面的不平等以及加强监测和评估机制来解决这些问题。此外,促进这些不同国家之间的知识共享将有助于促进相互学习。
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
Health Research Policy and Systems
Health Research Policy and Systems HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
7.50%
发文量
124
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Research Policy and Systems is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal that aims to provide a platform for the global research community to share their views, findings, insights and successes. Health Research Policy and Systems considers manuscripts that investigate the role of evidence-based health policy and health research systems in ensuring the efficient utilization and application of knowledge to improve health and health equity, especially in developing countries. Research is the foundation for improvements in public health. The problem is that people involved in different areas of research, together with managers and administrators in charge of research entities, do not communicate sufficiently with each other.
期刊最新文献
The embedded research model: an answer to the research and evaluation needs of community service organizations? Implementation of national policies and interventions (WHO Best Buys) for non-communicable disease prevention and control in Ghana: a mixed methods analysis. Policy impact of the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team: global perspective and United Kingdom case study. Real-world data to improve organ and tissue donation policies: lessons learned from the tissue and organ donor epidemiology study. "All of these things interact, that's why it's such a wicked problem": Stakeholders' perspectives of what hinders low back pain care in Australia and how to improve it.
×
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