Pelayanan Kesehatan
Yulita Hendrartini
Tujuan Umum
Bab ini memuat isu yang luas tentang
bagaimana sumber daya digunakan
dalam sektor kesehatan dan
menfokuskan pada efisiensi alokasi
(menempatkan sumber daya untuk
digunakan dalam cara yang dapat
memaksimalkan tujuan kesehatan dan
sosial yang lain).
Ada berbagai pertanyaan penting
dalam menetapkan prioritas:
Siapa yang harus dikonsultasi untuk
prioritas pelayanan?
Bagaimana menggabungkan berbagai
input yang berbeda untuk menghasilkan
rencana pelayanan?
Bagaimana sumber daya dan program
dialokasikan antar daerah?
Dan ketika sumberdaya tidak cukup
untuk membiayai pelayanan yang cost-
effective, bagaimana keputusan rasional
yang harus diambil?
Priority setting: siapa yang
harus diprioritaskan?
Ada berbagai kelompok :
Individual dan keluarga
Organisasi masyarakat
Staf kesehatan
Administrator kesehatan regional dan kabupaten
Pembuat kebijakan di tingkat nasional, pada Depkes
atau departemen yang lain
How cost-effective
What is the present
are present
resource flow for that
interventions?
disease/risk?
How cost-effective
could future
interventions be?
Stages in a PBMA (program budgeting marginal
analysis ) priority setting process
PBMA Stages
1) Determine the aim and scope of the priority setting exercise
2) Compile a program budget (i.e. map of current activity and expenditure)
3) Form marginal analysis advisory panel
4) Determinie locally relevant decision making criteria
a. Decision maker input
b. Board of Director input
c. Public input
5) Advisory panel to identify options in terms of:
a. areas for service growth
b. areas for resource release through producing same level of output (or
outcomes) but with less resources
c. areas for resource release through scaling back or stopping some services
6) Advisory panel to make recommendations in terms of:
a. funding growth areas with new resources
b. decisions to move resources from (5b) into (5a)
c. trade-off decisions to move resources from (5c) to (5a) if relative value in (5c)
is deemed greater than that in (5a)
7) Validity checks with additional stakeholders and final decisions to inform budget
planning process
Specific points to consider when applying PBMA
Ideal time to
Point to consider Rationale
address
Strategically select the first Need champion for group buy-in
PBMA exercise in a health Prior to specific and follow-through of
organization in an area where applications recommendations; early success
there is a confirmed champion being selected will aid in the organizational
and an 'easy-win' uptake of the approach
Use an introductory session to
Panel members have to
communicate underlying
At the outset of understand opportunity cost for
economic concepts and
the process buy-in; provides opportunity to
specifically what the
adjust the plan early on
application plan is
Need adequate time to review
literature and do background
Advisory panel meetings held Throughout the work but do not want a drawn
at 24 week intervals PBMA process
out process; complete in < 6
months
When
Consider using one-on-one
discussing Not all members will feel
meetings with advisory panel
options for comfortable presenting a view in
members to identify options
resource the larger group
for resource release
release
Data can only take the group so
Put less emphasis on having
Particularly in far and can be used as a crutch
all the 'data' to support a the later not to make a decision;
decision and more on drawing
sessions of the ultimately group need to have
out opinions from the expert
process confidence in making their own
group
recommendations
Stated at the Recommendations by
Earmark resources (i.e. staff
outset, carried themselves will not see action
time) to enact the panel
out following without dedicated resources to
recommendations
the exercise move them forward
Reliance on 'softer' forms of
evidence to support process This is the type of information
such as expert opinions and Throughout decision makers are familiar with
qualitative research, PBMA process and which is often available in
particularly when 'hard' practice
evidence is not available
Public may not have technical
Tap into public for
knowledge to make specific
development of criteria on At the outset of
trade-offs but certainly can offer
which decisions are to be the process
valuable insight on values and
based
specific criteria
Conditions of Accountability for
Reasonableness framework
Condition Description
Publicity Limit-setting decisions and their rationales must be publicly accessible.
These rationales must rest on evidence, reasons, and principles that fair-
minded parties (managers, clinicians, patients, and consumers in general)
Relevance
can agree are relevant to deciding how to meet the diverse needs of a
covered population under necessary resource constraints.
There is a mechanism for challenge and dispute resolution regarding limit-
Appeals setting decisions, including the opportunity for revising decisions in light of
further evidence or arguments.
There is either voluntary or public regulation of the process to ensure that
Enforcement
the first three conditions are met.
Barriers and facilitators for explicit
priority setting
Barriers Facilitators
- senior level managerial and clinical
- lack of trust between stakeholders
champions
- physicians not on board - strong leadership
- advisory panel lacking health economic
- culture to learn and change
knowledge and/ or allocation experience
- politics preventing program evaluation - integrated budgets
- resources earmarked for process itself and
- discontinuity of personnel
follow-up on recommendations
- too many administrative demands leaving - built in incentives for appropriate and
priority setting as a low priority activity efficient spending
KESIMPULAN
Penetapan Prioritas harus dilakukan dalam
setiap implementasi program karena
KETERBATASAN SUMBER DAYA
Perlu komunikasi dan advocacy antar
stakeholder untuk menetapkan program
prioritas
Prioritas Program ditetapkan secara
nasional, namun harus mempertimbangkan
faktor lokal dalam implementasinya