Social Values in Health Prioritizing: the analysis of national documents of Iran

Authors

Abstract

Background: Health system, as a part of the wider social system, should consider social values in decisions for health prioritizing. This study was aimed at identifying social values considered in the health-related national documents.

Methods: This qualitative study was conducted based on the Clark-Weale framework to identify the social values in health related national documents. Identification of health-related basic documents (11 documents) was performed purposefully. Documents included Iran's Constitution Law, the 5-year development plan, national health insurance law, urban family physician program, health sector development map, Health Ministry foundation law and Health Ministry structure and organizational law. Each value was analyzed based on qualitative content analysis.

Results: Different approaches toward considering social values were observed. While some documents had explicitly considered social values, some others had implicitly considered them. The health Road Map was the most comprehensive document in terms of considering social values. Equity was the most repeated value in documents and clinical effectiveness was not mentioned in any of the documents.

Conclusion: Although, the importance of social values has been increased in national documents during the recent years, it dose not have the same trend in different documents and each of them have emphasized on different social values. It seems that using national documents, as a practical guide, can be effective in achieving health system goals. 

Keywords


1. Gibson JL, Martin DK, Singer PA. Priority setting for new technologies in medicine: A transdisciplinary study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2002; 2: 14. 2. Peacock S, Mitton C, Bate A, McCoy B, Donaldson C. Overcoming barriers to priority setting using interdisciplinary methods. Health Policy. 2009;92(2-3):124-32. 3. Teng F, Mitton C, Mackenzie J. Priority setting in the provincial health services authority: survey of key decision makers. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007; 7: 84. 4. Buse K, Mays N, Walt G. Making Health Policy. 2th ed. London: McGraw-Hill; 2012. 5. Makundi E, Kapiriri L, Norheim OF. Combining evidence and values in priority setting: testing the balance sheet method in a low-income country. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007;7:152. 6. Sabik LM, Lie RK. Priority setting in health care: Lessons from the experiences of eight countries. Int J Equity Health. 2008;7:4. 7. Kapiriri L, Norheim OF, Martin DK. Fairness and accountability for reasonableness. Do the views of priority setting decision makers differ across health systems and levels of decision making? Soc Sci Med. 2009;68(4):766-73. 8. Mitton C, Donaldson C. Priority Setting Toolkit: Guide to the Use of Economics in Healthcare Decision Making. 1th ed. London: BMJ Books; 2004. 9. Youngkong S, Kapiriri L, Baltussen R. Setting priorities for health interventions in developing countries: a review of empirical studies. Trop Med Int Health. 2009;14(8):930-9. 10. Mitton C, Smith N, Peacock S, Evoyd B, Abelson J. Public participation in health care priority setting: A scoping review. Health Policy. 2009; 91(3):219-28. 11. Olsen JA. Aiding priority setting in health care: is there a role for the contingent valuation method? Health Econ. 1997;6(6):603-12. 12. Stefanini A. Editorial: Ethics in health care priority-setting: a north–south double standard? Tropical Medicine & International Health. 1999;4(11): 709-12. 13. Clark S, Weale A. Social values in health priority setting: a conceptual framework. J Health Organ Manag. 2012;26(3):293-316. 14. Mitton CR, Donaldson C. Setting priorities and allocating resources in health regions: lessons from a project evaluating program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA). Health Policy. 2003;64(3):335-48. 15. Vuorenkoski L, Toiviainen H, Hemminki E. Decision-making in priority setting for medicines--a review of empirical studies. Health Policy. 2008;86(1):1-9. 16. Daniels N. Accountability for reasonableness. BMJ. 2000;321(7272):1300-1. 17. Giacomini M, Hurley J, Gold I, Smith P, Abelson J. The policy analysis of 'values talk': lessons from Canadian health reform. Health Policy. 2004;67(1):15-24. 18. Eslami RA. The analytical methods of political and diplomatic documents. Quarterly of Foreign Relations History. 2011;12(48):1-26. Persian 19. Khan MM, Heuvel W. Description and Content Analysis of the National Health Policy of Pakistan. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health. 2006; 33-51. 20. Khayatzadeh-Mahani A, Fotaki M, Harvey G. Ethical theories and values in priority setting: a case study of the Iranian health system. Public Health Ethics. 2013;6(1):60-72. 21. Sapsford R, Jupp V. Data Collection and Analysis. 2th ed. London: Sage; 2006. 22. The Research Center of the Islamic Republic of Iran Parliament. The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran.; 1989 [cited 2015 Agu 18]. Available from: http://rc.majlis.ir/fa/content/iran_constitution 23. Formation Act of the Ministry of Health and Medical Education; 1985. [cited 2015 Agu 18] Available from: http://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/show/91112 24. The Research Center of the Islamic Republic of Iran Parliament. The Ministry of Health and Medical Education Act and Duties Legislation; 1985. [cited 2014 Feb 20] Available from: http://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/show/91555 25. The Research Center of the Islamic Republic of Iran Parliament. The 5th Five-year Development Plan Legislation of the Islamic Republic of Iran; 2010. [cited 2015 Agu 10] Available from: http://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/show/790196 26. Comprehensive Database for Iranian Doctors. The Law of Public Health Insurance; 1993. [cited 2015 Feb 15] Available from: www.irteb.com/bimedarmanee/bime%20hamaganee.htm 27. The Ministry of Health, Treatment and Medical Education- Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare. The Instructions for the Family Physician and Referral System Program in urban regions. 2th ed. 2006. [cited 2015 Agu 18] Available from: http://th.ihio.gov.ir/Portal/File/ShowFile.aspx?ID=d4980317-a206-4a76-8137-72144cafb8f6 28. Secretariat of the Council for Health Policy and Reform, Health Plan of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the fifth economic, social and cultural development program 2010-2014; 2012. [cited 2015 Agu 18]. Available from: irimc.org/FileManager/health_map_1394.pdf?Lang=FA 29. Takian A, Doshmangir L, Rashidian A. Implementing family physician programme in rural Iran: exploring the role of an existing primary health care network. Fam Pract. 2013;30(5):551-9. 30. Whitty JA, Littlejohns P. Social values and health priority setting in Australia: an analysis applied to the context of health technology assessment. Health Policy. 2015;119(2):127-36. 31. Pinto AD, Manson H, Pauly B, Thanos J, Parks A, Cox A. Equity in public health standards: a qualitative document analysis of policies from two Canadian provinces. Int J Equity Health. 2012;11:28. 32. Kapiriri L, Norheim OF, Heggenhougen K. Using burden of disease information for health planning in developing countries: the experience from Uganda. Soc Sci Med. 2003;56(12):2433-41. 33. Maluka S, Kamuzora P, San Sebastián M, Byskov J, Ndawi B, Hurtig AK. Improving district level health planning and priority setting in Tanzania through implementing accountability for reasonableness framework: Perceptions of stakeholders. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010; 10: 322. 34. Ahn J, Kim G, Suh HS, Lee SM. Social values and healthcare priority setting in Korea. J Health Organ Manag. 2012;26(3):343-50. 35. Kieslich K. Social values and health priority setting in Germany. J Health Organ Manag. 2012;26(3):374-83. 36. Tantivess S, Pérez Velasco R, Yothasamut J, Mohara A, Limprayoonyong H, Teerawattananon Y. Efficiency or equity: value judgments in coverage decisions in Thailand. J Health Organ Manag. 2012;26(3):331-42. 37. Littlejohns P, Sharma T, Jeong K. Social values and health priority setting in England: "values" based decision making. J Health Organ Manag. 2012;26(3):363-73.