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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |