Health insurance benefit package in Iran: a qualitative policy process analysis.


Journal

BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 Aug 2020
Historique:
received: 28 08 2019
accepted: 28 07 2020
entrez: 9 8 2020
pubmed: 9 8 2020
medline: 29 12 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Insufficient transparency in prioritization of health services, multiple health insurance organizations with various and not-aligned policies, plus limited resources to provide comprehensive health coverage are among the challenges to design appropriate Health Insurance Benefit Package (HIBP) in Iran. This study aims to analyze Policy Process of Health Insurance Benefit Package in Iran. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 25 experts, plus document analysis and observation, from February 2014 until October 2016. Using both deductive and inductive approaches, two independent researchers conducted data content analysis. We used MAXQDA.11 software for data management. We identified 10 main themes, plus 81 sub-themes related to development and implementation of HIBP. These included: lack of transparent criteria for inclusion of services within HIBP, inadequate use of scientific evidence to determine the HIBP, lack of evaluation systems, and weak decision-making process. We propose 11 solutions and 25 policy options to improve the situation. The design and implementation of HIBP did not follow an evidence-based and logical algorithm in Iran. Rather, political and financial influences at the macro level determined the decisions. This is rooted in social, cultural, and economic norms in the country, whereby political and economic factors had the greatest impact on the implementation of HIBP. To define a cost-effective HIBP in Iran, it is pivotal to develop transparent and evidence-based guidelines about the processes and the stewardship of HIBP, which are in line with upstream policies and societal characteristics. In addition, the possible conflict of interests and its harms should be minimized in advance.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Insufficient transparency in prioritization of health services, multiple health insurance organizations with various and not-aligned policies, plus limited resources to provide comprehensive health coverage are among the challenges to design appropriate Health Insurance Benefit Package (HIBP) in Iran. This study aims to analyze Policy Process of Health Insurance Benefit Package in Iran.
METHOD METHODS
Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 25 experts, plus document analysis and observation, from February 2014 until October 2016. Using both deductive and inductive approaches, two independent researchers conducted data content analysis. We used MAXQDA.11 software for data management.
RESULTS RESULTS
We identified 10 main themes, plus 81 sub-themes related to development and implementation of HIBP. These included: lack of transparent criteria for inclusion of services within HIBP, inadequate use of scientific evidence to determine the HIBP, lack of evaluation systems, and weak decision-making process. We propose 11 solutions and 25 policy options to improve the situation.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
The design and implementation of HIBP did not follow an evidence-based and logical algorithm in Iran. Rather, political and financial influences at the macro level determined the decisions. This is rooted in social, cultural, and economic norms in the country, whereby political and economic factors had the greatest impact on the implementation of HIBP. To define a cost-effective HIBP in Iran, it is pivotal to develop transparent and evidence-based guidelines about the processes and the stewardship of HIBP, which are in line with upstream policies and societal characteristics. In addition, the possible conflict of interests and its harms should be minimized in advance.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32762695
doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05592-w
pii: 10.1186/s12913-020-05592-w
pmc: PMC7409638
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

722

Subventions

Organisme : World Health Organization
ID : 001
Pays : International

Références

Olyaeemanesh A, Behzadifar M, Mousavinejhad N, Behzadifar M, Heydarvand S, Azari S, et al. Iran’s health system transformation plan: a SWOT analysis. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2018;32:39.
doi: 10.14196/mjiri.32.39
Bevan G, Hood C. Health policy: have targets improved performance in the English NHS? BMJ: British Medical Journal. 2006;332(7538):419.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.332.7538.419
Mohamadi E, Tabatabaei SM, Olyaeemanesh A, Sagha SF, Zanganeh M, Davari M, et al. Coverage Decision-Making for Orthopedics Interventions in the Health Transformation Program in Iran: A Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA). Shiraz E-Medical Journal. 2016;17(12).
Saltman R, Rico A, Boerma W. Social health insurance systems in western Europe: McGraw-hill education (UK); 2004.
Oliver A, editor Health care priority setting: implications for health inequalities. Proceedings from a meeting of the Health Equity Network Londres, The Nuffield Trust; 2003.
Segal L, Chen Y. Priority setting models for health. Report to the population health division West Heidelberg. Centre for Health Program Evaluation, februari: Australia; 2001.
Teerawattananon Y, Kingkaew P, Koopitakkajorn T, Youngkong S, Tritasavit N, Srisuwan P, et al. Development of a health screening package under the universal health coverage: the role of health technology assessment. Health Econ. 2016;25(S1):162–78.
doi: 10.1002/hec.3301
Bazyar M, Rashidian A, Kane S, Mahdavi MRV, Sari AA, Doshmangir L. Policy options to reduce fragmentation in the pooling of health insurance funds in Iran. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016;5(4):253.
doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2016.12
Mohamadi E, Olyaeemanesh A, Rashidian A, Hassanzadeh A, Razavi M, Foroushani AR. Stakeholders analysis of health insurance benefit package policy in iran. Health Scope. 2017;7(2).
Mohamadi E, Olyaeemanesh A, Rashidian A, FOROUSHANI AR, Hassanzadeh A, Hasumi M, et al. Measuring public preferences for changes in the health Insur-ance benefit package policies in Iran: a survey approach. Iran J Public Health. 2020;49(5):940–8.
pubmed: 32953682 pmcid: 7475621
Danaei G, Farzadfar F, Kelishadi R. Rashidian A. Ahmadnia S, et al. Iran in transition. The Lancet: Rouhani OM; 2019.
Buse K, Mays N, Walt G. Making health policy: McGraw-hill education (UK); 2012.
Weimer DL, Vining AR. Policy analysis: concepts and practice: Taylor & Francis; 2017.
doi: 10.4324/9781315442129
Kingdon JW. A model of agenda-setting, with applications. L Rev MSU-DCL. 2001;331.
Meessen B, Hercot D, Noirhomme M, Ridde V, Tibouti A, Tashobya CK, et al. Removing user fees in the health sector: a review of policy processes in six sub-Saharan African countries. Health policy and planning. 2011;26(suppl_2):ii16-ii29.
Rochaix L, Xerri B. National Authority for health: France: Commonwealth Fund; 2009.
Rivillas JC, Ortiz D, Henao AC. Rapid assessment of the purchasing arrangements in health system of Colombia. F1000Research. 2018;7.
Picazo OF, Ulep VGT, Pantig IM, Ho BL. A critical analysis of purchasing of health services in the Philippines: a case study of PhilHealth. PIDS Discussion Paper Series, 2015.
Dehnavieh R, Sirizi MJ, Mehrolhassani MH, Kalantari A. Strategic purchasing of healthcare services in developing countries: a new approach is required. Iran J Public Health. 2016;45(9):1241.
pubmed: 27957476 pmcid: 5149485
Greß S, Niebuhr D, Rothgang H, Wasem J. Criteria and procedures for determining benefit packages in health care: a comparative perspective. Health Policy. 2005;73(1):78–91.
doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2004.10.005
Youngkong S, Baltussen R, Tantivess S, Mohara A, Teerawattananon Y. Multicriteria decision analysis for including health interventions in the universal health coverage benefit package in Thailand. Value Health. 2012;15(6):961–70.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.06.006
Defechereux T, Paolucci F, Mirelman A, Youngkong S, Botten G, Hagen TP, et al. Health care priority setting in Norway a multicriteria decision analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12(1):39.
doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-39

Auteurs

Efat Mohamadi (E)

Health Equity ResearchCenter (HERC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Amirhossein Takian (A)

Health Equity ResearchCenter (HERC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Department of Health Management and Economics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Department of Global Health and Public Policy, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Alireza Olyaeemanesh (A)

Health Equity ResearchCenter (HERC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. arolyaee@gmail.com.
National Institute of Health Research, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, No. 70, Bozorgmehr Ava., Vesal St., Keshavars Blvd, Tehran, 1416833481, Iran. arolyaee@gmail.com.

Arash Rashidian (A)

Department of Health Management and Economics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Information, Evidence and Research Department, Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office, World Health Organization, Cairo, Egypt.

Ali Hassanzadeh (A)

Health Insurance Organization of Iran, Tehran, Iran.

Moaven Razavi (M)

Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, USA.

Sadegh Ghazanfari (S)

Department of Health Management and Economics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH