Setting Health Priorities in Low-Income and Middle-Income Countries in the ASIA-Pacific Region: The Case of Papua New Guinea
Author(s)
Tuffaha H1, Radford K2, Chai A2, Rutherford S2, Harris N2, Scuffham P3
1University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia, 2Griffith University, Nathan, Brisbane, QLD, Australia, 3Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
OBJECTIVES Economic evaluations can guide priority setting in low‐income and middle‐income countries (LMICs). Nevertheless, many LMICs in the Asia-Pacific region do not have the capacity to produce and use economic evaluations. Priority setting in Papua New Guinea (PNG) has historically been based on individual decisions and information that core personnel have at that time. We aimed to explore whether a structured health economics training could alter the perceptions of decision-makers in PNG about setting healthcare priorities. METHODS A standardised survey was administered to senior health professionals from PNG before and after they completed a 12-week Graduate Certificate in Health Economics at Griffith University. Data collected included demographic information, educational background and professional experience. Participants were asked about the approaches for priority setting in PNG. RESULTS The survey was administered to 23 participants, 22 returned the pre-course survey and 16 returned the post-course survey. The mean age was between 30-39 years, 55% were female. All participants had an undergraduate degree or higher with 47% of participants having postgraduate qualifications. In the pre-course, participants reported that health priorities should be based on the burden of disease (24.2%), socio-political (21.25%), equity (18.2%), clinical evidence (16.7%) economic evaluations (15.2%) and other reasons (4.5%). In the post course, participants reported that priorities should be set based on economic evaluations (21%), clinical evidence (21%), equity (21%), burden of disease (20%) and socio-political considerations (17%). CONCLUSIONS These findings indicate that the training program delivered broadened the mindset of participants when prioritising health initiatives within PNG. A structured health economics training could alter the perceptions of decision-makers in LMICs in the Asia-Pacific region about using economic evaluations in setting healthcare priorities.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2020-09, ISPOR Asia Pacific 2020, Seoul, South Korea
Value in Health Regional, Volume 22S (September 2020)
Code
PNS23
Topic
Health Policy & Regulatory, Health Technology Assessment, Organizational Practices
Topic Subcategory
Decision & Deliberative Processes, Geographic & Regional, Public Spending & National Health Expenditures
Disease
No Specific Disease