Cargando…

The Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Health Insurance Benefit Package Revision in Iran

Background: Iran considers the revision of its health insurance benefit package (HIBP) as a means to achieve universal health coverage (UHC). Yet, its decision-making process has been criticised for being weak in terms of accountability and transparency. This paper reports on the development and imp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nouhi, Mojtaba, Baltussen, Rob, Razavi, Seyed Sajad, Bijlmakers, Leon, Sahraian, Moahmmad Ali, Goudarzi, Zahra, Farokhian, Parisa, Khedmati, Jamaleddin, Jahangiri, Reza, Olyaeemanesh, Alireza
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9818091/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35247943
http://dx.doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2022.6485
_version_ 1784864899694854144
author Nouhi, Mojtaba
Baltussen, Rob
Razavi, Seyed Sajad
Bijlmakers, Leon
Sahraian, Moahmmad Ali
Goudarzi, Zahra
Farokhian, Parisa
Khedmati, Jamaleddin
Jahangiri, Reza
Olyaeemanesh, Alireza
author_facet Nouhi, Mojtaba
Baltussen, Rob
Razavi, Seyed Sajad
Bijlmakers, Leon
Sahraian, Moahmmad Ali
Goudarzi, Zahra
Farokhian, Parisa
Khedmati, Jamaleddin
Jahangiri, Reza
Olyaeemanesh, Alireza
author_sort Nouhi, Mojtaba
collection PubMed
description Background: Iran considers the revision of its health insurance benefit package (HIBP) as a means to achieve universal health coverage (UHC). Yet, its decision-making process has been criticised for being weak in terms of accountability and transparency. This paper reports on the development and implementation of the HIBP revision in Iran in the period 2019-2021, employing evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs), a framework for benefit package design with the explicit aim of optimising the legitimacy of decision-making. Methods: The High Council for Health Insurance (HCHI) is coordinating the HIBP revision: it planned the six steps of the EDP framework with support from World Health Organization (WHO) and Radboudumc in 2019, and conducted a pilot project on multiple sclerosis (MS) diagnosis and treatment in 2020. Results: Implementation of the MS pilot project concerned the installation of advisory committees (involving some 60 stakeholders in supportive task forces, a technical working group [TWG] and a national advisory committee [NAC]), the selection of decision criteria (relating to quality of care, necessity, and sustainability), the inclusion of services for evaluation (nine in total), and the assessment and appraisal of these services. Conclusion: Implementation of the priority setting process for MS diagnosis and treatment services has likely improved the legitimacy of decision-making by involving stakeholders who engaged in deliberation based on available evidence in a stepwise, transparent process. It is expected to improve the quality of care for MS patients as well as its financial accessibility, at a zero net budget impact. The pilot project has served to help Iran’s health system move faster toward UHC for a broader range of essential health services.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9818091
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Kerman University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98180912023-01-18 The Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Health Insurance Benefit Package Revision in Iran Nouhi, Mojtaba Baltussen, Rob Razavi, Seyed Sajad Bijlmakers, Leon Sahraian, Moahmmad Ali Goudarzi, Zahra Farokhian, Parisa Khedmati, Jamaleddin Jahangiri, Reza Olyaeemanesh, Alireza Int J Health Policy Manag Original Article Background: Iran considers the revision of its health insurance benefit package (HIBP) as a means to achieve universal health coverage (UHC). Yet, its decision-making process has been criticised for being weak in terms of accountability and transparency. This paper reports on the development and implementation of the HIBP revision in Iran in the period 2019-2021, employing evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs), a framework for benefit package design with the explicit aim of optimising the legitimacy of decision-making. Methods: The High Council for Health Insurance (HCHI) is coordinating the HIBP revision: it planned the six steps of the EDP framework with support from World Health Organization (WHO) and Radboudumc in 2019, and conducted a pilot project on multiple sclerosis (MS) diagnosis and treatment in 2020. Results: Implementation of the MS pilot project concerned the installation of advisory committees (involving some 60 stakeholders in supportive task forces, a technical working group [TWG] and a national advisory committee [NAC]), the selection of decision criteria (relating to quality of care, necessity, and sustainability), the inclusion of services for evaluation (nine in total), and the assessment and appraisal of these services. Conclusion: Implementation of the priority setting process for MS diagnosis and treatment services has likely improved the legitimacy of decision-making by involving stakeholders who engaged in deliberation based on available evidence in a stepwise, transparent process. It is expected to improve the quality of care for MS patients as well as its financial accessibility, at a zero net budget impact. The pilot project has served to help Iran’s health system move faster toward UHC for a broader range of essential health services. Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2022-03-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9818091/ /pubmed/35247943 http://dx.doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2022.6485 Text en © 2022 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Nouhi, Mojtaba
Baltussen, Rob
Razavi, Seyed Sajad
Bijlmakers, Leon
Sahraian, Moahmmad Ali
Goudarzi, Zahra
Farokhian, Parisa
Khedmati, Jamaleddin
Jahangiri, Reza
Olyaeemanesh, Alireza
The Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Health Insurance Benefit Package Revision in Iran
title The Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Health Insurance Benefit Package Revision in Iran
title_full The Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Health Insurance Benefit Package Revision in Iran
title_fullStr The Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Health Insurance Benefit Package Revision in Iran
title_full_unstemmed The Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Health Insurance Benefit Package Revision in Iran
title_short The Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Health Insurance Benefit Package Revision in Iran
title_sort use of evidence-informed deliberative processes for health insurance benefit package revision in iran
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9818091/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35247943
http://dx.doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2022.6485
work_keys_str_mv AT nouhimojtaba theuseofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT baltussenrob theuseofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT razaviseyedsajad theuseofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT bijlmakersleon theuseofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT sahraianmoahmmadali theuseofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT goudarzizahra theuseofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT farokhianparisa theuseofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT khedmatijamaleddin theuseofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT jahangirireza theuseofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT olyaeemaneshalireza theuseofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT nouhimojtaba useofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT baltussenrob useofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT razaviseyedsajad useofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT bijlmakersleon useofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT sahraianmoahmmadali useofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT goudarzizahra useofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT farokhianparisa useofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT khedmatijamaleddin useofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT jahangirireza useofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran
AT olyaeemaneshalireza useofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesforhealthinsurancebenefitpackagerevisioniniran