{"title":"在南亚和东南亚国家的卫生规划和决策中优先考虑外科、产科、创伤和麻醉护理:南亚和东南亚的 SOTA 护理政策。","authors":"Saloni Mitra, Ritika Shetty, Shirish Rao, Sweta Dubey, Siddhesh Zadey","doi":"10.5334/aogh.4532","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background:</i> Lack of policy prioritization of surgical, obstetric, trauma and anesthesia (SOTA) care in South and Southeast Asian countries could be a potential contributor to limited access to care. <i>Objective:</i> To assess the SOTA care prioritization in National Health Policies, Strategies, and Plans (NHPSPs). <i>Methods:</i> We analyzed NHPSPs from twelve South and Southeast Asian countries. These documents are considered the most important health‑related policy statements. Bangladesh was excluded due to a lack of English translations. We searched sixteen electronic documents for a predefined list of keywords. The list included 52 keywords related to SOTA care and 7 keywords unrelated to SOTA care (used as a control). We used the keyword frequency (mentions per keyword or MPK) as a measure to compare prioritization between SOTA care and non‑SOTA care. We further categorized the SOTA care keywords into five different Lancet Commission on Global Surgery (LCoGS) domains and eight subgroups. <i>Findings:</i> Across twelve NHPSPs, MPK value for SOTA care was 54.09 compared with 202.86 for non‑SOTA, with eight NHPSPs having lower MPK values for SOTA care than non‑SOTA keywords. Four NHPSPs had no mentions related to SOTA care financing and information management. Pediatric surgery and anesthesia were among the neglected subgroups. <i>Conclusion:</i> The analysis of South and Southeast Asian NHPSPs suggests that SOTA care issues are not prioritized in most countries. Pathways to greater policy attention include integrating SOTA care into ongoing health policy‑making and planning efforts and developing and implementing specific national SOTA care plans.</p>","PeriodicalId":48857,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Global Health","volume":"90 1","pages":"80"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11639693/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prioritization of Surgical, Obstetric, Trauma, and Anesthesia Care in South and Southeast Asian Countries' Health Planning and Policy‑making: SOTA Care Policies in South and Southeast Asia.\",\"authors\":\"Saloni Mitra, Ritika Shetty, Shirish Rao, Sweta Dubey, Siddhesh Zadey\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/aogh.4532\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><i>Background:</i> Lack of policy prioritization of surgical, obstetric, trauma and anesthesia (SOTA) care in South and Southeast Asian countries could be a potential contributor to limited access to care. <i>Objective:</i> To assess the SOTA care prioritization in National Health Policies, Strategies, and Plans (NHPSPs). <i>Methods:</i> We analyzed NHPSPs from twelve South and Southeast Asian countries. These documents are considered the most important health‑related policy statements. Bangladesh was excluded due to a lack of English translations. We searched sixteen electronic documents for a predefined list of keywords. The list included 52 keywords related to SOTA care and 7 keywords unrelated to SOTA care (used as a control). We used the keyword frequency (mentions per keyword or MPK) as a measure to compare prioritization between SOTA care and non‑SOTA care. We further categorized the SOTA care keywords into five different Lancet Commission on Global Surgery (LCoGS) domains and eight subgroups. <i>Findings:</i> Across twelve NHPSPs, MPK value for SOTA care was 54.09 compared with 202.86 for non‑SOTA, with eight NHPSPs having lower MPK values for SOTA care than non‑SOTA keywords. Four NHPSPs had no mentions related to SOTA care financing and information management. Pediatric surgery and anesthesia were among the neglected subgroups. <i>Conclusion:</i> The analysis of South and Southeast Asian NHPSPs suggests that SOTA care issues are not prioritized in most countries. Pathways to greater policy attention include integrating SOTA care into ongoing health policy‑making and planning efforts and developing and implementing specific national SOTA care plans.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48857,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Global Health\",\"volume\":\"90 1\",\"pages\":\"80\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11639693/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Global Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.4532\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.4532","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:南亚和东南亚国家缺乏优先考虑外科、产科、创伤和麻醉(SOTA)护理的政策,这可能是导致护理机会有限的一个潜在原因。目标:评估国家卫生政策、战略和计划(NHPSPs)中手术、产科、创伤和麻醉护理的优先次序。方法:我们对国家卫生政策、战略和计划进行了分析:我们分析了 12 个南亚和东南亚国家的国家卫生政策、战略和计划。这些文件被认为是最重要的卫生相关政策声明。由于缺乏英文翻译,孟加拉国被排除在外。我们对十六份电子文件进行了搜索,并预先定义了关键词列表。该列表包括 52 个与 SOTA 护理相关的关键词和 7 个与 SOTA 护理无关的关键词(作为对照)。我们使用关键词频率(每个关键词的提及次数或 MPK)作为衡量标准,比较 SOTA 护理和非 SOTA 护理之间的优先级。我们进一步将 SOTA 护理关键词分为五个不同的柳叶刀全球外科委员会 (LCoGS) 领域和八个亚组。研究结果在 12 个 NHPSPs 中,SOTA 护理的 MPK 值为 54.09,而非 SOTA 的 MPK 值为 202.86,其中 8 个 NHPSPs 中 SOTA 护理关键词的 MPK 值低于非 SOTA 关键词。有四份国家医疗服务指南没有提及与 SOTA 护理融资和信息管理相关的内容。小儿外科和麻醉是被忽视的亚组。结论对南亚和东南亚 NHPSPs 的分析表明,大多数国家并未将 SOTA 护理问题列为优先事项。提高政策关注度的途径包括将SOTA护理纳入正在进行的卫生政策制定和规划工作,以及制定和实施具体的国家SOTA护理计划。
Prioritization of Surgical, Obstetric, Trauma, and Anesthesia Care in South and Southeast Asian Countries' Health Planning and Policy‑making: SOTA Care Policies in South and Southeast Asia.
Background: Lack of policy prioritization of surgical, obstetric, trauma and anesthesia (SOTA) care in South and Southeast Asian countries could be a potential contributor to limited access to care. Objective: To assess the SOTA care prioritization in National Health Policies, Strategies, and Plans (NHPSPs). Methods: We analyzed NHPSPs from twelve South and Southeast Asian countries. These documents are considered the most important health‑related policy statements. Bangladesh was excluded due to a lack of English translations. We searched sixteen electronic documents for a predefined list of keywords. The list included 52 keywords related to SOTA care and 7 keywords unrelated to SOTA care (used as a control). We used the keyword frequency (mentions per keyword or MPK) as a measure to compare prioritization between SOTA care and non‑SOTA care. We further categorized the SOTA care keywords into five different Lancet Commission on Global Surgery (LCoGS) domains and eight subgroups. Findings: Across twelve NHPSPs, MPK value for SOTA care was 54.09 compared with 202.86 for non‑SOTA, with eight NHPSPs having lower MPK values for SOTA care than non‑SOTA keywords. Four NHPSPs had no mentions related to SOTA care financing and information management. Pediatric surgery and anesthesia were among the neglected subgroups. Conclusion: The analysis of South and Southeast Asian NHPSPs suggests that SOTA care issues are not prioritized in most countries. Pathways to greater policy attention include integrating SOTA care into ongoing health policy‑making and planning efforts and developing and implementing specific national SOTA care plans.
期刊介绍:
ANNALS OF GLOBAL HEALTH is a peer-reviewed, open access journal focused on global health. The journal’s mission is to advance and disseminate knowledge of global health. Its goals are improve the health and well-being of all people, advance health equity and promote wise stewardship of the earth’s environment.
The journal is published by the Boston College Global Public Health Program. It was founded in 1934 by the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai as the Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine. It is a partner journal of the Consortium of Universities for Global Health.