解读南非国家药物政策的制定过程--全民医保的经验教训。

IF 3.3 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2024-07-17 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1080/20523211.2024.2376349
Andrew L Gray, Fatima Suleman
{"title":"解读南非国家药物政策的制定过程--全民医保的经验教训。","authors":"Andrew L Gray, Fatima Suleman","doi":"10.1080/20523211.2024.2376349","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>South Africa's National Drug Policy (NDP) was first issued in 1996, at a time of considerable political change.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To revisit the lessons learned from the process of development and initial implementation of the NDP.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Six in-depth face-to-face interviews were held with purposively-selected key actors. Interviews, which followed pre-determined semi-structured questions, but were allowed to explore additional areas, were recorded and transcribed, and then subjected to abductive thematic analysis, informed by the Walt and Gilson model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three key themes emerged, described as 'evidence', 'trust' and 'looking forward'. A paucity of evidence backed some of the key concepts in the NDP, and these have not been addressed as evidence has matured. The lack of trust which characterised the policy process impacted on the ways in which actors were able to or not able to engage, and therefore on the resultant content and the choices exercised. The coherence of the policy, its articulation with other health reforms, and its contribution to subsequent efforts to ensure universal health coverage in South Africa have all been weakened by the failure to revise the document over time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>As South Africa advances its plans for universal health coverage, there is an urgent need to revisit key components of the NDP which are no longer fit for purpose.</p>","PeriodicalId":16740,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11256999/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unpacking the process of developing South Africa's national drug policy - lessons for universal health coverage.\",\"authors\":\"Andrew L Gray, Fatima Suleman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20523211.2024.2376349\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>South Africa's National Drug Policy (NDP) was first issued in 1996, at a time of considerable political change.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To revisit the lessons learned from the process of development and initial implementation of the NDP.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Six in-depth face-to-face interviews were held with purposively-selected key actors. Interviews, which followed pre-determined semi-structured questions, but were allowed to explore additional areas, were recorded and transcribed, and then subjected to abductive thematic analysis, informed by the Walt and Gilson model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three key themes emerged, described as 'evidence', 'trust' and 'looking forward'. A paucity of evidence backed some of the key concepts in the NDP, and these have not been addressed as evidence has matured. The lack of trust which characterised the policy process impacted on the ways in which actors were able to or not able to engage, and therefore on the resultant content and the choices exercised. The coherence of the policy, its articulation with other health reforms, and its contribution to subsequent efforts to ensure universal health coverage in South Africa have all been weakened by the failure to revise the document over time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>As South Africa advances its plans for universal health coverage, there is an urgent need to revisit key components of the NDP which are no longer fit for purpose.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16740,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11256999/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20523211.2024.2376349\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20523211.2024.2376349","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:南非国家毒品政策(NDP)于 1996 年首次发布,当时正值重大政治变革时期:重新审视从国家毒品政策的制定和初步实施过程中汲取的经验教训:方法:对特意挑选的主要参与者进行了六次面对面的深入访谈。访谈按照预先确定的半结构化问题进行,但允许探索其他领域,访谈进行了记录和誊写,然后根据 Walt 和 Gilson 模型进行了归纳主题分析:出现了三个关键主题,分别是 "证据"、"信任 "和 "展望"。缺乏证据支持国家发展计划中的一些关键概念,而这些概念并没有随着证据的成熟而得到解决。政策制定过程中缺乏信任,这影响了参与者参与或不参与的方式,从而影响了最终的内容和选择。该政策的连贯性、与其他医疗改革的衔接,以及对随后确保南非全民医保的努力所做的贡献,都因未能随着时间的推移对文件进行修订而被削弱:结论:随着南非全民医保计划的推进,亟需重新审视《国家发展计划》中已不再适用的关键部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Unpacking the process of developing South Africa's national drug policy - lessons for universal health coverage.

Background: South Africa's National Drug Policy (NDP) was first issued in 1996, at a time of considerable political change.

Objectives: To revisit the lessons learned from the process of development and initial implementation of the NDP.

Methods: Six in-depth face-to-face interviews were held with purposively-selected key actors. Interviews, which followed pre-determined semi-structured questions, but were allowed to explore additional areas, were recorded and transcribed, and then subjected to abductive thematic analysis, informed by the Walt and Gilson model.

Results: Three key themes emerged, described as 'evidence', 'trust' and 'looking forward'. A paucity of evidence backed some of the key concepts in the NDP, and these have not been addressed as evidence has matured. The lack of trust which characterised the policy process impacted on the ways in which actors were able to or not able to engage, and therefore on the resultant content and the choices exercised. The coherence of the policy, its articulation with other health reforms, and its contribution to subsequent efforts to ensure universal health coverage in South Africa have all been weakened by the failure to revise the document over time.

Conclusion: As South Africa advances its plans for universal health coverage, there is an urgent need to revisit key components of the NDP which are no longer fit for purpose.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice Health Professions-Pharmacy
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
9.50%
发文量
81
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Association of anxiolytic drugs with Torsade de Pointes: a pharmacovigilance study of the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System. Factors influencing healthcare providers' behaviours in deprescribing: a cross-sectional study. Good manufacturing practice inspections conducted by Tanzania medicines and medical devices authority: a comparative study of two fiscal years from 2018 to 2020. Unused medicine take-back programmes: a systematic review. Community pharmacy & primary care integration: qualitative study on stakeholders' opinions and interventions.
×
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