使用混合方法了解和解决获得医疗服务的障碍。

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Natalia Houghton, Ernesto Bascolo, Andrés Coitiño, Theadora S Koller, James Fitzgerald
{"title":"使用混合方法了解和解决获得医疗服务的障碍。","authors":"Natalia Houghton, Ernesto Bascolo, Andrés Coitiño, Theadora S Koller, James Fitzgerald","doi":"10.26633/RPSP.2023.117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This report describes the experience and lessons learnt from designing and implementing a combined quantitative and qualitative method to assess barriers to accessing health services. This approach was developed to study barriers to access in five dimensions: availability; geographical, financial, and organizational accessibility; acceptability; contact; and effective coverage. The study design was used in six countries in the World Health Organization Region of the Americas. The findings highlight the importance of having a well defined analysis framework and the benefits of adopting a mixed-methods approach. Using existing data and contextualizing findings according to specific population groups and geographical areas were essential for relevance and utilization of the study outcomes. The findings demonstrate the feasibility of using mixed methods to understand the complexity of access problems faced by different subpopulations. By involving decision-makers from the beginning and allowing flexibility for sustained discussions, the analysis and findings had an impact. The engagement of health authorities and key stakeholders facilitated the use of the findings for collaborative identification of policy options to eliminate access barriers. Lessons learnt from the study emphasized the need for active participation of decision-makers, flexibility in the process, and sustained opportunities for discussion to ensure impact. Giving consideration to local priorities and adapting the methods accordingly were important for the relevance and use of the findings. Future efforts could consider incorporating mixed methods into national and local monitoring and evaluation systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":21264,"journal":{"name":"Revista Panamericana De Salud Publica-pan American Journal of Public Health","volume":"47 ","pages":"e117"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/b0/6f/rpsp-47-e117.PMC10441553.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using mixed methods to understand and tackle barriers to accessing health services.\",\"authors\":\"Natalia Houghton, Ernesto Bascolo, Andrés Coitiño, Theadora S Koller, James Fitzgerald\",\"doi\":\"10.26633/RPSP.2023.117\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This report describes the experience and lessons learnt from designing and implementing a combined quantitative and qualitative method to assess barriers to accessing health services. This approach was developed to study barriers to access in five dimensions: availability; geographical, financial, and organizational accessibility; acceptability; contact; and effective coverage. The study design was used in six countries in the World Health Organization Region of the Americas. The findings highlight the importance of having a well defined analysis framework and the benefits of adopting a mixed-methods approach. Using existing data and contextualizing findings according to specific population groups and geographical areas were essential for relevance and utilization of the study outcomes. The findings demonstrate the feasibility of using mixed methods to understand the complexity of access problems faced by different subpopulations. By involving decision-makers from the beginning and allowing flexibility for sustained discussions, the analysis and findings had an impact. The engagement of health authorities and key stakeholders facilitated the use of the findings for collaborative identification of policy options to eliminate access barriers. Lessons learnt from the study emphasized the need for active participation of decision-makers, flexibility in the process, and sustained opportunities for discussion to ensure impact. Giving consideration to local priorities and adapting the methods accordingly were important for the relevance and use of the findings. Future efforts could consider incorporating mixed methods into national and local monitoring and evaluation systems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21264,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Panamericana De Salud Publica-pan American Journal of Public Health\",\"volume\":\"47 \",\"pages\":\"e117\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/b0/6f/rpsp-47-e117.PMC10441553.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Panamericana De Salud Publica-pan American Journal of Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26633/RPSP.2023.117\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Panamericana De Salud Publica-pan American Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26633/RPSP.2023.117","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本报告介绍了在设计和实施定量与定性相结合的方法以评估获取医疗服务的障碍方面所汲取的经验和教训。这种方法从五个方面研究了获得医疗服务的障碍:可获得性;地理、财政和组织上的可获得性;可接受性;联系;以及有效覆盖。研究设计在世界卫生组织美洲地区的六个国家进行。研究结果强调了制定明确的分析框架的重要性以及采用混合方法的益处。利用现有数据,并根据特定人群和地理区域的背景对研究结果进行分析,对于研究成果的相关性和利用至关重要。研究结果表明,采用混合方法了解不同亚人群所面临的获取问题的复杂性是可行的。通过让决策者从一开始就参与进来,并允许灵活地进行持续讨论,分析和研究结果产生了影响。卫生当局和主要利益相关者的参与促进了研究结果的使用,有助于共同确定政策方案,消除获取障碍。从研究中汲取的经验教训强调了决策者积极参与的必要性、过程的灵活性以及持续的讨论机会,以确保产生影响。考虑当地的优先事项并相应地调整方法对于研究结果的相关性和使用非常重要。今后的工作可以考虑将混合方法纳入国家和地方监测与评估系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Using mixed methods to understand and tackle barriers to accessing health services.

This report describes the experience and lessons learnt from designing and implementing a combined quantitative and qualitative method to assess barriers to accessing health services. This approach was developed to study barriers to access in five dimensions: availability; geographical, financial, and organizational accessibility; acceptability; contact; and effective coverage. The study design was used in six countries in the World Health Organization Region of the Americas. The findings highlight the importance of having a well defined analysis framework and the benefits of adopting a mixed-methods approach. Using existing data and contextualizing findings according to specific population groups and geographical areas were essential for relevance and utilization of the study outcomes. The findings demonstrate the feasibility of using mixed methods to understand the complexity of access problems faced by different subpopulations. By involving decision-makers from the beginning and allowing flexibility for sustained discussions, the analysis and findings had an impact. The engagement of health authorities and key stakeholders facilitated the use of the findings for collaborative identification of policy options to eliminate access barriers. Lessons learnt from the study emphasized the need for active participation of decision-makers, flexibility in the process, and sustained opportunities for discussion to ensure impact. Giving consideration to local priorities and adapting the methods accordingly were important for the relevance and use of the findings. Future efforts could consider incorporating mixed methods into national and local monitoring and evaluation systems.

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
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
3.80%
发文量
222
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信