Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Health Care Analysis 2/2010

01-06-2010 | Original Article

Successful Priority Setting in Low and Middle Income Countries: A Framework for Evaluation

Authors: Lydia Kapiriri, Douglas K. Martin

Published in: Health Care Analysis | Issue 2/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Priority setting remains a big challenge for health managers and planners, yet there is paucity of literature on evaluating priority setting. The purpose of this paper is to present a framework for evaluating priority setting in low and middle income countries. We conducted a qualitative study involving a review of literature and Delphi interviews with respondents knowledgeable of priority setting in low and middle income countries. Respondents were asked to identify the measures of successful priority setting in low and middle income countries. Responses were grouped as: immediate internal or external/delayed internal or external. We also identified some pre-requisites for successful priority setting. The immediate internal measures included increased efficiency in decision making, improved quality of decisions and fairer priority setting. Immediate External measures included—improved public understanding and acceptance of decisions, increased public participation, increased trust. Delayed Internal measures included increased satisfaction, understanding, compliance, balanced budget, achievement of organization goals, and improved internal accountability. Delayed External measures include impact on policy and practice, improved population health and reduction of health inequalities, achievement of health system goals and strengthening of health care systems. Identified pre-requisites for successful priority setting included; the presence of credible priority setting institutions, incentives for participation and implementation and resources, capacity and political will to implement. These would be augmented in a conducive political, social and economic context. This framework, although not exhaustive, provides a practical basis for planning and evaluating priority setting in low and middle income countries.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Baltussen, R., & Niessen, L. (2006). Priority setting of health interventions: The need for multi-criteria decision analysis. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 4, 14.CrossRefPubMed Baltussen, R., & Niessen, L. (2006). Priority setting of health interventions: The need for multi-criteria decision analysis. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 4, 14.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Brinkerhoff, D. (2004). Accountability and health systems: Toward conceptual clarity and policy relevance. Health Policy and Planning, 19(6), 371–379.CrossRefPubMed Brinkerhoff, D. (2004). Accountability and health systems: Toward conceptual clarity and policy relevance. Health Policy and Planning, 19(6), 371–379.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Bryant, J. H. (2000). Health priority dilemmas in developing countries. In A. Coulter & C. Ham (Eds.), The global challenge of health care rationing (pp. 63–74). Buckingham: Open University Press. Bryant, J. H. (2000). Health priority dilemmas in developing countries. In A. Coulter & C. Ham (Eds.), The global challenge of health care rationing (pp. 63–74). Buckingham: Open University Press.
4.
go back to reference Daniels, N., Bryant, J., Castano, R. A., et al. (2000). Benchmarks of fairness for health care reform: A policy tool for developing countries. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 78(6), 740–750.PubMed Daniels, N., Bryant, J., Castano, R. A., et al. (2000). Benchmarks of fairness for health care reform: A policy tool for developing countries. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 78(6), 740–750.PubMed
5.
go back to reference Daniels, N., & Sabin, J. E. (2002). Setting limits fairly: Can we learn to share medical resources? (170 pp.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Daniels, N., & Sabin, J. E. (2002). Setting limits fairly: Can we learn to share medical resources? (170 pp.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
6.
go back to reference Edgar, W. (2005). Practical issues in priority setting in health care international seminar on reforming health social security. Tokyo: Keio University, June 27–29. Edgar, W. (2005). Practical issues in priority setting in health care international seminar on reforming health social security. Tokyo: Keio University, June 27–29.
7.
go back to reference Edger, W. (2002). Success and failures in priority setting. Paper prepared for the 4th international conference on priorities in health care, Oslo, Norway. September 27–29. Edger, W. (2002). Success and failures in priority setting. Paper prepared for the 4th international conference on priorities in health care, Oslo, Norway. September 27–29.
8.
go back to reference Gericke, C. A., Kurowski, C., Ranson, M. K., & Mills, A. (2005). Intervention complexity—a conceptual framework to inform priority-setting in health. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 83(4), 285–293.PubMed Gericke, C. A., Kurowski, C., Ranson, M. K., & Mills, A. (2005). Intervention complexity—a conceptual framework to inform priority-setting in health. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 83(4), 285–293.PubMed
10.
go back to reference Gibson, J. L., Martin, D. K., & Singer, P. A. (2005). Priority setting in hospitals: Fairness, inclusiveness, and the problem of institutional power differences. Social Science and Medicine, 61(11), 2355–2362.CrossRefPubMed Gibson, J. L., Martin, D. K., & Singer, P. A. (2005). Priority setting in hospitals: Fairness, inclusiveness, and the problem of institutional power differences. Social Science and Medicine, 61(11), 2355–2362.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Goold, S. D., Biddle, A. K., Klipp, G., Hall, C. N., & Danis, M. (2005). Choosing health plans all together: A deliberative exercise from allocating limited health care resources. Journal of Health Polit Policy Law, 30(4), 563–601.CrossRef Goold, S. D., Biddle, A. K., Klipp, G., Hall, C. N., & Danis, M. (2005). Choosing health plans all together: A deliberative exercise from allocating limited health care resources. Journal of Health Polit Policy Law, 30(4), 563–601.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Hauck, K., Smith, P. C., & Goddard, M. (2003, November). The economics of priority setting for health care: A literature review. HNP Discussion Paper, Washington, DC. Hauck, K., Smith, P. C., & Goddard, M. (2003, November). The economics of priority setting for health care: A literature review. HNP Discussion Paper, Washington, DC.
15.
go back to reference Jan, S. (2003). Why does economic analysis in health care not get implemented more? Towards a greater understanding of the rules of the game and costs of decision making. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 2(1), 17–24.PubMed Jan, S. (2003). Why does economic analysis in health care not get implemented more? Towards a greater understanding of the rules of the game and costs of decision making. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 2(1), 17–24.PubMed
16.
go back to reference Kapiriri, L., Arnesen, T., & Norheim, O. F. (2004). Is cost-effectiveness analysis preferred to severity of disease as the main guiding principle in priority setting in resource poor settings? The case of Uganda. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 2(1), 1–11.CrossRefPubMed Kapiriri, L., Arnesen, T., & Norheim, O. F. (2004). Is cost-effectiveness analysis preferred to severity of disease as the main guiding principle in priority setting in resource poor settings? The case of Uganda. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 2(1), 1–11.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Kapiriri, L., & Martin, D. K. (2006). The global fund secretariat’s suspension of funding to Uganda: How could this have been avoided? Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 84(7), 576–580.CrossRefPubMed Kapiriri, L., & Martin, D. K. (2006). The global fund secretariat’s suspension of funding to Uganda: How could this have been avoided? Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 84(7), 576–580.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Kapiriri, L., & Martin, D. K. (2007). A strategy to improve priority setting in low and middle income countries. Health Care Analysis, 15(3), 159–167.CrossRefPubMed Kapiriri, L., & Martin, D. K. (2007). A strategy to improve priority setting in low and middle income countries. Health Care Analysis, 15(3), 159–167.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Kapiriri, L., & Norheim, O. F. (2004). Criteria for priority setting in health care in Uganda: Exploration of stakeholders’ values. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 82, 172–179.PubMed Kapiriri, L., & Norheim, O. F. (2004). Criteria for priority setting in health care in Uganda: Exploration of stakeholders’ values. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 82, 172–179.PubMed
20.
go back to reference Kapiriri, L., Norheim, O. F., & Heggenhougen, K. (2003). Using the burden of disease information for health planning in developing countries: Experiences from Uganda. Social Science and Medicine, 56(12), 2433–2441.CrossRefPubMed Kapiriri, L., Norheim, O. F., & Heggenhougen, K. (2003). Using the burden of disease information for health planning in developing countries: Experiences from Uganda. Social Science and Medicine, 56(12), 2433–2441.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Kapiriri, L., Norheim, O. F., & Heggenhougen, K. (2003). Public participation in health planning and priority setting at the district level in Uganda. Health Policy and Planning, 18(2), 205–213.CrossRefPubMed Kapiriri, L., Norheim, O. F., & Heggenhougen, K. (2003). Public participation in health planning and priority setting at the district level in Uganda. Health Policy and Planning, 18(2), 205–213.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Kapiriri, L., Norheim, O. F., & Martin, D. K. (2007). Priority setting at the micro-, meso- and macro-levels in Canada. Norway and Uganda Health Policy, 82(1), 78–94. Kapiriri, L., Norheim, O. F., & Martin, D. K. (2007). Priority setting at the micro-, meso- and macro-levels in Canada. Norway and Uganda Health Policy, 82(1), 78–94.
23.
go back to reference Khan, K. S. (2000). Public health priorities and the social determinants of ill health. In A. Coulter & C. Ham (Eds.), The global challenge of health care rationing (pp. 74–88). Philadelphia: Open University Press. Khan, K. S. (2000). Public health priorities and the social determinants of ill health. In A. Coulter & C. Ham (Eds.), The global challenge of health care rationing (pp. 74–88). Philadelphia: Open University Press.
24.
go back to reference Klein, R., & Williams, A. (2003). Setting priorities: What is holding us back—inadequate information or inadequate institutions? In C. Klein Ham & G. Robert (Eds.), Reasonable rationing. International experience of priority setting in health care (pp. 13–15). Maidenhead, Philadelphia: Open university Press. Klein, R., & Williams, A. (2003). Setting priorities: What is holding us back—inadequate information or inadequate institutions? In C. Klein Ham & G. Robert (Eds.), Reasonable rationing. International experience of priority setting in health care (pp. 13–15). Maidenhead, Philadelphia: Open university Press.
25.
go back to reference Martin, D. K., Shulman, K., Santiago-Sorrell, P., & Singer, P. A. (2003). Priority setting and hospital strategic planning: A qualitative case study. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 8, 197–201.CrossRef Martin, D. K., Shulman, K., Santiago-Sorrell, P., & Singer, P. A. (2003). Priority setting and hospital strategic planning: A qualitative case study. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 8, 197–201.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Mitton, C., & Donaldson, C. (2004). Health care priority setting: Principles, practice and challenges. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 2, 3.CrossRefPubMed Mitton, C., & Donaldson, C. (2004). Health care priority setting: Principles, practice and challenges. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 2, 3.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference PUMA policy brief No. 5. (1998). Best practice guidelines for evaluation. Public Management service, OECD. PUMA policy brief No. 5. (1998). Best practice guidelines for evaluation. Public Management service, OECD.
28.
go back to reference Sabik, L. M., & Lie, R. K. (2008). Priority setting in health care: Lessons from the experiences of eight countries. International Journal for Equity in Health, 7, 4.CrossRefPubMed Sabik, L. M., & Lie, R. K. (2008). Priority setting in health care: Lessons from the experiences of eight countries. International Journal for Equity in Health, 7, 4.CrossRefPubMed
29.
30.
go back to reference Sundewall, J., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2006). Translations of health sector SWAPs—a comparative study of health sector development cooperation in Uganda, Zambia and Bangladesh. Health Policy, 76, 277–287.CrossRefPubMed Sundewall, J., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2006). Translations of health sector SWAPs—a comparative study of health sector development cooperation in Uganda, Zambia and Bangladesh. Health Policy, 76, 277–287.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Waddington, C. (2004). Does earmarked donor funding make it more or less likely that developing countries will allocate their resources towards programs that yield the greatest health benefits? Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 82(9), 703–706.PubMed Waddington, C. (2004). Does earmarked donor funding make it more or less likely that developing countries will allocate their resources towards programs that yield the greatest health benefits? Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 82(9), 703–706.PubMed
32.
go back to reference WHO. (2000). The world health report (pp. 47–72). World Health Organization, Geneva. WHO. (2000). The world health report (pp. 47–72). World Health Organization, Geneva.
Metadata
Title
Successful Priority Setting in Low and Middle Income Countries: A Framework for Evaluation
Authors
Lydia Kapiriri
Douglas K. Martin
Publication date
01-06-2010
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Health Care Analysis / Issue 2/2010
Print ISSN: 1065-3058
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3394
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-009-0115-2

Other articles of this Issue 2/2010

Health Care Analysis 2/2010 Go to the issue