管理中低收入国家卫生领域私营部门的方法、促进因素和障碍:范围界定审查。

IF 7.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Catherine Goodman, Sophie Witter, Mark Hellowell, Louise Allen, Shuchi Srinivasan, Swapna Nixon, Ayesha Burney, Debrupa Bhattacharjee, Anna Cocozza, Gabrielle Appleford, Aya Thabet, David Clarke
{"title":"管理中低收入国家卫生领域私营部门的方法、促进因素和障碍:范围界定审查。","authors":"Catherine Goodman, Sophie Witter, Mark Hellowell, Louise Allen, Shuchi Srinivasan, Swapna Nixon, Ayesha Burney, Debrupa Bhattacharjee, Anna Cocozza, Gabrielle Appleford, Aya Thabet, David Clarke","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2024-015771","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The private sector plays a substantial role in delivering and financing healthcare in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Supporting governments to govern the private sector effectively, and so improve outcomes across the health system, requires an understanding of the evidence base on private health sector governance. This paper reports on a scoping review, which synthesised evidence on the approaches used to govern private sector delivery and financing of healthcare in LMICs, the effectiveness of these approaches and the key enablers and barriers to strengthening governance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We undertook a systematic search of databases of published articles and grey literature to identify eligible papers published since 2010, drawing on WHO's governance definition. Data were extracted into a pretested matrix and analysed using narrative synthesis, structured by WHO's six governance behaviours and an additional cross-cutting theme on capacities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>107 studies were selected as relevant, covering 101 LMICs. Qualitative methods and document/literature review were predominant. The findings demonstrate the relevance of the WHO governance behaviours, but the lack of robust evidence for approaches to implementing them. Valuable insights from the literature include the need for a clear vision around governance aims; the importance of ensuring that policy dialogue processes are inclusive and transparent, avoiding interest group capture; the benefits of exploiting synergies between governance mechanisms; and the need to develop capacity to enact governance among both public and private actors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Governance choices shape not just the current health system, but also its future development. Common barriers to effective governance must be addressed in policy design, stakeholder engagement, public and private sector accountability, monitoring and capacity. Achieving this will require in-depth explorations of governance mechanisms and more rigorous documentation of implementation and outcomes in diverse contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"8 Suppl 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Approaches, enablers and barriers to govern the private sector in health in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Catherine Goodman, Sophie Witter, Mark Hellowell, Louise Allen, Shuchi Srinivasan, Swapna Nixon, Ayesha Burney, Debrupa Bhattacharjee, Anna Cocozza, Gabrielle Appleford, Aya Thabet, David Clarke\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjgh-2024-015771\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The private sector plays a substantial role in delivering and financing healthcare in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Supporting governments to govern the private sector effectively, and so improve outcomes across the health system, requires an understanding of the evidence base on private health sector governance. This paper reports on a scoping review, which synthesised evidence on the approaches used to govern private sector delivery and financing of healthcare in LMICs, the effectiveness of these approaches and the key enablers and barriers to strengthening governance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We undertook a systematic search of databases of published articles and grey literature to identify eligible papers published since 2010, drawing on WHO's governance definition. Data were extracted into a pretested matrix and analysed using narrative synthesis, structured by WHO's six governance behaviours and an additional cross-cutting theme on capacities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>107 studies were selected as relevant, covering 101 LMICs. Qualitative methods and document/literature review were predominant. The findings demonstrate the relevance of the WHO governance behaviours, but the lack of robust evidence for approaches to implementing them. Valuable insights from the literature include the need for a clear vision around governance aims; the importance of ensuring that policy dialogue processes are inclusive and transparent, avoiding interest group capture; the benefits of exploiting synergies between governance mechanisms; and the need to develop capacity to enact governance among both public and private actors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Governance choices shape not just the current health system, but also its future development. Common barriers to effective governance must be addressed in policy design, stakeholder engagement, public and private sector accountability, monitoring and capacity. Achieving this will require in-depth explorations of governance mechanisms and more rigorous documentation of implementation and outcomes in diverse contexts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"volume\":\"8 Suppl 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-015771\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-015771","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:在低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs),私营部门在提供和资助医疗保健方面发挥着重要作用。要支持政府有效管理私营部门,从而改善整个医疗系统的成果,就必须了解私营医疗部门管理的证据基础。本文报告了一项范围综述,该综述综合了有关 LMICs 中用于管理私营部门医疗服务和融资的方法、这些方法的有效性以及加强管理的主要促进因素和障碍的证据:我们对数据库中已发表的文章和灰色文献进行了系统检索,以确定自 2010 年以来根据世界卫生组织的治理定义发表的符合条件的论文。数据被提取到一个经过预先测试的矩阵中,并按照世卫组织的六种治理行为和另外一个关于能力的交叉主题,使用叙述性综合方法进行分析:选出了 107 项相关研究,涵盖 101 个低收入和中等收入国家。定性方法和文件/文献综述占主导地位。研究结果表明,世卫组织的治理行为具有相关性,但缺乏有力的证据来证明实施这些行为的方法。从文献中获得的有价值的见解包括:需要有围绕治理目标的明确愿景;必须确保政策对话过程具有包容性和透明度,避免利益集团的俘获;利用治理机制之间的协同作用的好处;以及需要发展公共和私人行为者实施治理的能力:治理的选择不仅决定了当前的卫生系统,也决定了其未来的发展。必须在政策设计、利益相关者的参与、公共和私营部门的问责制、监督和能力等方面解决阻碍有效治理的共同障碍。要做到这一点,就必须深入探讨治理机制,更严格地记录不同情况下的实施情况和成果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Approaches, enablers and barriers to govern the private sector in health in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

Introduction: The private sector plays a substantial role in delivering and financing healthcare in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Supporting governments to govern the private sector effectively, and so improve outcomes across the health system, requires an understanding of the evidence base on private health sector governance. This paper reports on a scoping review, which synthesised evidence on the approaches used to govern private sector delivery and financing of healthcare in LMICs, the effectiveness of these approaches and the key enablers and barriers to strengthening governance.

Methods: We undertook a systematic search of databases of published articles and grey literature to identify eligible papers published since 2010, drawing on WHO's governance definition. Data were extracted into a pretested matrix and analysed using narrative synthesis, structured by WHO's six governance behaviours and an additional cross-cutting theme on capacities.

Results: 107 studies were selected as relevant, covering 101 LMICs. Qualitative methods and document/literature review were predominant. The findings demonstrate the relevance of the WHO governance behaviours, but the lack of robust evidence for approaches to implementing them. Valuable insights from the literature include the need for a clear vision around governance aims; the importance of ensuring that policy dialogue processes are inclusive and transparent, avoiding interest group capture; the benefits of exploiting synergies between governance mechanisms; and the need to develop capacity to enact governance among both public and private actors.

Conclusion: Governance choices shape not just the current health system, but also its future development. Common barriers to effective governance must be addressed in policy design, stakeholder engagement, public and private sector accountability, monitoring and capacity. Achieving this will require in-depth explorations of governance mechanisms and more rigorous documentation of implementation and outcomes in diverse contexts.

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
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
×
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