International Journal of Health Policy and Management最新文献

In their scoping review Bennett et al. present a summary framework for public health surveillance of unhealthy commodity industries (UCI) that impact human health, which is important in view of the rising burden of non-communicable diseases, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The authors focus on the tobacco, alcohol and food and beverage industry and discuss who should 'own' the process; where in the public sector administration the responsibility should lie; and how and which practices or organizations to monitor. They also argue that the monitoring should transition from academia and civil society to (sub)-national governments because of their central role in the protection of public health. This commentary argues that the challenges related to NCD policymaking in LMICs should be viewed from within a political economy perspective and that support for UCI monitoring has to be bolstered by independent accountability mechanisms and rights-based advocacy at national and global level.

This commentary addresses Ronald Labonté's recent editorial, "can a well-being economy save us?" It considers how to assess whether well-being economy policy proposals are likely to achieve real change, or simply represent performative sloganeering. It considers Labonté's discussion of the congruence between the well-being economy and widely held, cross-cultural values. Finally it explores the relationship between "well-being economics" and the key heterodox economic disciplines it has sprung from, especially ecological and feminist economics; and explores the relationship of well-being economics with degrowth and postgrowth economics as policy goals and models, rather than disciplines. Ultimately, a well-being economy can only "save us" if it is fully guided by and constrained within the same hard ecological constraints that must also guide degrowth or post-growth policy prescriptions.

Background: Hospital-acquired pressure ulcers (HAPUs) constitute an important source of concern for healthcare systems due to their negative consequences on patient quality of life and hospital costs. This phenomenon is increasing worldwide, driven by an aging population and increasing prevalence of chronic conditions. This economic evaluation aimed to determine whether using a multilayer, silicone-adhesive polyurethane foam dressing shaped for the sacrum area, alongside standard prevention (SP), is cost-effective in preventing HAPUs for hospitalized patients compared to SP alone.

Methods: We developed a decision-analytic model to estimate the expected costs and clinical benefits of using the polyurethane foam dressing from Italian and US payor perspectives. Model inputs were taken from published studies, and uncertainty was assessed using one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA).

Results: From both US and Italian perspectives, using a foam dressing in addition to SP was found to be cost-saving in all hospital settings. That is, it reduced the incidence of HAPUs at a lower cost overall. The estimated savings were €179 per patient and $305 per patient from Italian and US perspectives. Following sensitivity analysis, the results remained cost-saving, suggesting that our findings are robust.

Conclusion: This is the first economic analysis investigating the cost-effectiveness of preventive dressings and standard prevention for avoiding sacral pressure ulcers for at-risk hospitalized patients. This analysis suggests that using a multilayer polyurethane foam dressing to prevent sacral HAPUs in at-risk hospitalized patients is a cost-effective strategy compared with standard prevention alone and, therefore, should be considered as a strategy for PU prevention in hospital settings.

The impact of COVID-19 on the Italian population is well-known and has been deeply analysed under the clinical and epidemiological perspectives where the majority of the studies focused on the beginning of the first wave (March-May 2020). However, there is a need for analysing this complex phenomenon integrating the clinical side with the economic and social lens to better understand implications of a pandemic for populations. In their paper Masino and Enria focused the attention on four specific perspectives: health system reaction to the pandemic, inequalities in the work world, social care from the elderly point of view and the government communication challenges. In this commentary, I take these different perspectives trying to outline how they have been explored and analysed during these three years after their publication.

Deliberative dialogue (DD) may be relatively new in health research but has a rich history in fostering public engagement in political issues. Dialogic approaches are future-facing, comprising structured discussions and consensus building activities geared to the collective identification of actionable and contextualized solutions. Relying heavily on a need for coproduction and shared leadership, these approaches seek to garner meaningful collaborations between researchers and knowledge users, such as healthcare providers, decision-makers, patients, and the public. In this commentary, we explore some of the challenges, successes, and opportunities arising from public engagement in DD, drawing also upon insights gleaned from our own research, along with the case study presented by Scurr and colleagues. Specifically, we seek to expand discussions related to inclusion, power, and accessibility in DD, highlight the need for scholarship that addresses the epistemic, methodological, and practical aspects of patient and public engagement within dialogic methods, and identify promising practices.

This editorial critiques the existing literature on decolonizing global health, using the current assault on health in Gaza as a case in point. It argues that the failure to address the ongoing violence and blatant targeting of health facilities, personnel and innocent civilians demonstrates most clearly the limitations of an approach that is strong on rhetoric and weak on mounting a forthright challenge to the entire system supporting and perpetuating settler colonialism. We propose a more radical rethinking of the position of global health institutions within the current neoliberal system and of the systems of knowledge production that continue to underpin the existing colonial approach to the health of victims of settler colonialism.

Recent regulatory reforms have favored expedited drug marketing and increased reliance on Phase IV clinical trials for safety and efficacy assurance. This study, utilizing ClinicalTrials.gov, assesses the characteristics of Phase IV trials, with at least one site in Canada, examing those funded by industry sponsors and those lacking industry funding. Additionally, it compares the publication status of industry-funded and non-industry-funded trials through a manual review of the medical literature. Between 2000 and 2022, 864 Phase IV trials were completed, with 480 (55.6%) receiving industry funding and 384 (44.4%) funded solely by non-industry sources. Industry-funded clinical trials were larger (mean 204 enrollees versus 70), more likely to be international (57.7% versus 9.6%) and reported results more promptly (1.21 years after completion versus 1.85 years), yet both types shared similar design, outcomes, and completion time. Publication rates were 81.8% for industry-funded and 65.8% for non-industry-funded trials. The ClinicalTrials.gov registry displayed 48 inaccuracies in publication associations, raising concerns about its accuracy. Our findings underscore the existing institutional limitations in ensuring comprehensive reporting and publication of Phase IV trial results funded by both industry and non-industry sources.

Background: Unhealthy commodity industries (UCIs) engage in political practices to influence public health policy, which poses barriers to protecting and promoting public health. Such influence exhibits characteristics of a complex system. Systems thinking would therefore appear to be a useful lens through which to study this phenomenon, potentially deepening our understanding of how UCI influence are interconnected with one another through their underlying political, economic and social structures. As such this study developed a qualitative systems map to depict the complex pathways through which UCIs influence public health policy and how they are interconnected with underlying structures.

Methods: Online participatory systems mapping workshops were conducted between November 2021 and February 2022. As a starting point for the workshops, a preliminary systems map was developed based on recent research. Twenty-three online workshops were conducted with 52 geographically diverse stakeholders representing academia, civil society, public office and global governance organisations. Analysis of workshop data in NVivo and feedback from participants resulted in a final systems map.

Results: The preliminary systems map consisted of 40 elements across six interdependent themes. The final systems map consisted of 64 elements across five interdependent themes, representing key pathways through which UCIs impact health policymaking: 1) direct access to public sector decision-makers; 2) creation of confusion and doubt about policy decisions; 3) corporate prioritisation of commercial profits and growth; 4) industry leveraging the legal and dispute settlement processes; and 5) industry leveraging policymaking, norms, rules, and processes.

Conclusion: UCI influence on public health policy is highly complex, involves interlinked practices, and is not reducible to a single point within the system. Instead, pathways to UCI influence emerge from the complex interactions between disparate national and global political, economic and social structures. These pathways provide numerous avenues for UCIs to influence public health policy, which poses challenges to formulating a singular intervention or limited set of interventions capable of effectively countering such influence. Using participatory methods, we made transparent the interconnections that could help identify interventions future work.

Background: Several initiatives have been developed to target low-value care (i.e. waste) in decision-making with varying success. As such, decision-making is a complex process and context's influence on decisions concerning low-value care is limitedly explored. Hence, a more detailed understanding of residents' decision-making is needed to reduce future low-value care. This study explores which contextual factors residents experience to influence their decision-making concerning low-value care. Methods: We employed nominal group technique to select four low-value care vignettes. Prompted by these vignettes, we conducted individual interviews with residents. We analyzed the qualitative data thematically using an inductive-deductive approach, guided by Bronfenbrenner's social-ecological framework. This framework provided guidance to 'context' in terms of sociopolitical, environmental, organizational, interpersonal, and individual levels.

Results: In 2022, we interviewed 19 residents from a Dutch university medical center. We identified 33 contextual factors influencing residents' decision-making, either encouraging or discouraging low-value care. The contextual factors resided in the following levels with corresponding categories: (1) environmental and sociopolitical: society, professional medical association, and governance; (2) organizational: facility characteristics, social infrastructure, and work infrastructure; (3) interpersonal: resident-patient, resident-supervising physician, and resident-others; and (4) individual: personal attributes and work structure.

Conclusion: This paper describes 33 contextual factors influencing residents' decision-making concerning low-value care. Residents are particularly influenced by factors related to interactions with patients and supervisors. Furthermore, organizational factors and the broader environment set margins within which residents make decisions. While acknowledging that a multi(faceted)-intervention approach targeting all contextual factors to discourage low-value care delivery may be warranted, improving communication skills in the resident-patient dynamics to recognize and explain low-value care seems a particular point of interest over which residents can exercise an influence themselves.