查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 民眾對全民健保給付合理論責機制之態度調查
- 全民健康保險停保、復保制度檢討--法律與政策觀點
- 對健康保險多元化保險人體制的質疑
- 全民健康保險下疾病分類編碼品質與相關影響因素研究
- 健保多元改革 體制永續發展
- 全民健康保險之我見
- 全民健保對未來醫師來源在質與量上之影響
- 結合全民健康保險推展學校健康服務
- 不同物理治療分級支付標準對各級醫療院所之影響
- Process and Outcome: Gender Differences and Sex-Role Traits in the Assessment of Justice--With the Banking Industry in Taipei Area as an Illustration
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 民眾對全民健保給付合理論責機制之態度調查=Employing Accountability for Reasonableness in Taiwan's National Health Insurance: Exploration of Public Opinions |
---|---|
作 者 | 吳全峰; 董鈺琪; | 書刊名 | 臺灣公共衛生雜誌 |
卷 期 | 37:2 2018.04[民107.04] |
頁 次 | 頁166-181 |
分類號 | 412.56 |
關鍵詞 | 合理論責機制; 全民健康保險; 給付決策流程; 分配正義; Accountability for reasonableness; A4R; National health insurance; NHI; Treatment/drug reimbursement decision-making process; Distributive justice; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 合理論責機制(accountability for reasonableness, A4R)為健康照護分配正義評估提供完整連貫之理論架構,本研究目的便係瞭解民眾(作為重要利害關係人)對於將A4R要件納入全民健保給付決策機制之態度與認知,並探討可歸因性之相關因素。方法:研究對象為20歲以上全國民眾,採隨機抽樣並輔以電話訪問,樣本數為1,140位,以多項式邏輯斯迴歸探討可歸因性與民眾特性、公開性、參與性及可修正性之關聯性。結果:多數受訪者認為可歸因性、公開性、參與性與可修正性為健保給付決策機制之重要要素,但僅少數受訪者認識相關機制。就健保給付決定因素分析,重視藥物/醫療服務價格勝於治療效果者,與年齡、教育程度、收入、醫療利用、公開性及參與性有關;重視疾病負擔勝於治療效果者,與年齡、收入、慢性病及參與性有關。結論:民眾普遍認為健保給付決策機制納入A4R要件有其重要性,但認知與態度存在差距;且可歸因性與民眾特性、公開性、參與性有關。 |
英文摘要 | Objectives: Accountability for reasonableness (A4R) provides a coherent theoretical framework to evaluate healthcare distributive justice as part of healthcare policy. This study aimed to analyze people’s knowledge about and attitudes toward employing A4R (including relevance of decisions, transparency, involvement of stakeholders, and revisability) in the National Health Insurance (NHI) treatment/drug reimbursement decision-making process, and to explore factors associated with the relevance of such decisions. Methods: A total of 1,140 adults aged 20 and over were randomly sampled from a nationwide population and interviewed by telephone. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine the associations of individual characteristics, transparency, involvement of stakeholders, and revisability with the relevance of decisions. Results: Most respondents regarded A4R as essential to the NHI reimbursement decision-making process, but only few recognized how A4R was implemented. Additionally, with regard to considerations about setting healthcare priorities - (medical efficacy, disease burden, treatment/drug price), respondents' concerns about price were associated with age, education, income, medical utilization, and their subjective perspectives about transparency and the involvement of stakeholders. Their concerns about disease burden were associated with age, income, chronic disease status, and subjective perspective about the involvement of stakeholders. Conclusions: Even though most people agree on employing A4R to support fair priority-setting in NHI's reimbursement decision-making, a gap exists between their attitudes and knowledge. Additionally, public attitudes about the relevance of decisions are associated with socio-economic characteristics and concerns about transparency and the involvement of stakeholders. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。