管理公共卫生支出增长:公众的观点

IF 1 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Nuno Araújo, Ana Maria Reis, Ana Pinto Borges, Álvaro Rosa
{"title":"管理公共卫生支出增长:公众的观点","authors":"Nuno Araújo, Ana Maria Reis, Ana Pinto Borges, Álvaro Rosa","doi":"10.1177/09720634231201698","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The need to guarantee public health spending sustainability remains on the governments’ agenda, despite constant efforts to improve health sector efficiency and to contain health spending growth. In this paper, we analyse citizens’, managers’ and health professionals’ views concerning the choice of alternative National Health Service (NHS)’ financing sources and the selection of priority areas to be financed from public funds. The main novelty of this study is the auscultation and the evaluation of different stakeholders’ perspectives concerning health spending decisions, namely, health professionals, managers and the general public. An online questionnaire was used to collect data. Methods include descriptive and inferential statistics, a Pareto graph and a factorial analysis. Our results reveal the preferable additional NHS funding sources are lottery and games of chance and the increase in alcohol and tobacco taxes. The respondents defend that priorities should consider the improvement of the population’s health status, namely, considering the universality of access, equity, effectiveness and efficiency, in line with the NHS’ mission. Health professionals are also concerned about disease prevention and health promotion. This paper contributes empirical evidence to support health manager decisions, focusing on rationing decisions and alternative financing sources.","PeriodicalId":45421,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Management","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Managing Public Health Spending Growth: Public’s Views\",\"authors\":\"Nuno Araújo, Ana Maria Reis, Ana Pinto Borges, Álvaro Rosa\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09720634231201698\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The need to guarantee public health spending sustainability remains on the governments’ agenda, despite constant efforts to improve health sector efficiency and to contain health spending growth. In this paper, we analyse citizens’, managers’ and health professionals’ views concerning the choice of alternative National Health Service (NHS)’ financing sources and the selection of priority areas to be financed from public funds. The main novelty of this study is the auscultation and the evaluation of different stakeholders’ perspectives concerning health spending decisions, namely, health professionals, managers and the general public. An online questionnaire was used to collect data. Methods include descriptive and inferential statistics, a Pareto graph and a factorial analysis. Our results reveal the preferable additional NHS funding sources are lottery and games of chance and the increase in alcohol and tobacco taxes. The respondents defend that priorities should consider the improvement of the population’s health status, namely, considering the universality of access, equity, effectiveness and efficiency, in line with the NHS’ mission. Health professionals are also concerned about disease prevention and health promotion. This paper contributes empirical evidence to support health manager decisions, focusing on rationing decisions and alternative financing sources.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45421,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health Management\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09720634231201698\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09720634231201698","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管不断努力提高卫生部门的效率和控制卫生支出的增长,但保证公共卫生支出可持续性的必要性仍列在政府的议程上。在本文中,我们分析了公民、管理人员和卫生专业人员关于选择替代性国家卫生服务(NHS)融资来源和选择公共资金资助的优先领域的观点。本研究的主要新颖之处在于听取和评估不同利益相关者对卫生支出决策的看法,即卫生专业人员、管理人员和一般公众。使用在线问卷收集数据。方法包括描述性统计和推理统计、帕累托图和析因分析。我们的研究结果显示,更可取的额外NHS资金来源是彩票和机会游戏以及增加酒精和烟草税。答复国认为,优先事项应考虑改善人口的健康状况,即根据国民保健制度的使命,考虑普及、公平、效力和效率。卫生专业人员也关注疾病预防和健康促进。本文提供了经验证据,以支持卫生管理者的决策,重点是配给决策和替代融资来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Managing Public Health Spending Growth: Public’s Views
The need to guarantee public health spending sustainability remains on the governments’ agenda, despite constant efforts to improve health sector efficiency and to contain health spending growth. In this paper, we analyse citizens’, managers’ and health professionals’ views concerning the choice of alternative National Health Service (NHS)’ financing sources and the selection of priority areas to be financed from public funds. The main novelty of this study is the auscultation and the evaluation of different stakeholders’ perspectives concerning health spending decisions, namely, health professionals, managers and the general public. An online questionnaire was used to collect data. Methods include descriptive and inferential statistics, a Pareto graph and a factorial analysis. Our results reveal the preferable additional NHS funding sources are lottery and games of chance and the increase in alcohol and tobacco taxes. The respondents defend that priorities should consider the improvement of the population’s health status, namely, considering the universality of access, equity, effectiveness and efficiency, in line with the NHS’ mission. Health professionals are also concerned about disease prevention and health promotion. This paper contributes empirical evidence to support health manager decisions, focusing on rationing decisions and alternative financing sources.
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 Health Management
Journal of Health Management HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
84
×
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