Recommendations to improve insurance coverage for physiotherapy services in Iran: a multi criteria decision-making approach

Barriers and facilitators of integrating physiotherapy into primary health care settings: A systematic scoping review of qualitative research

Purpose

This scoping review investigated the barriers and facilitators to integrating physiotherapy into primary health care (PHC).

Materials and methods

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, ProQuest, and REHABDATA were searched. Two independent reviewers were involved in screening, selecting, and extracting data. Data were synthesized using thematic analysis.

Results

Of the 483 screened documents, 44 qualitative studies, primarily from high-income countries, were included. All of the studies had good methodological quality. Barriers and facilitators of integrating physiotherapy into PHC were extracted within the WHO six building blocks framework. In total, 41 items were identified as barriers to the integration process. The studies included 49 recommendations to facilitate integrating physiotherapy services into PHC.

Conclusion

Integrating physiotherapy services into PHC faces many barriers. The most commonly suggested potential barriers are poor knowledge of physicians about physiotherapy, ineffective teamwork, physiotherapists' time constraints/workload, a lack of clarity over the role and knowledge of physiotherapists, unawareness of physiotherapy users about these services, and lack of intra- and inter-professional collaborations. The most commonly suggested recommendations to facilitate the integration process include: Clarifying the role of involved professionals, strengthening teamwork, improving intra- and inter-professional collaborations, and providing comprehensive training programs for physiotherapists.

Multi-criteria decision-making methods applied in health-insurance underwriting

This study attempts to structure methodologically the health insurance underwriting process by applying Multi-criteria Decision-making (MCDM) analysis in health insurance underwriting. This is done by assigning a score to each health insurance applicant which can be used to determine whether he or she is accepted, rejected or accepted with special terms and conditions (such as exclusions, additional waiting periods and/ or surcharge). The introduction of MCDM approaches in health insurance underwriting enables the quantification of the selection criteria, the increased standardization and automation of the process and its alignment through quantitative indicators with the risk tolerance/ risk appetite of the insurer, and there lie the novelties of this research. The proposed methodology can be readily implemented by insurers with added value in the underwriting, risk management and distribution (sales & marketing) functions, as well as in the profitability of the company or the level of premium paid by the insured.

Prioritizing population-based nutrition-related interventions to prevent and control hypertension in Iran: a multi-criteria decision-making approach

Background

Numerous nutrition-related policy options and strategies have been proposed to tackle hypertension and other risk factors of non-communicable diseases (NCDs). In this study, we developed a comparative analysis using a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model for prioritizing population-based nutrition-related interventions to prevent and control hypertension in Iran.

Methods

We employed a combination of Delphi technique and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method as the methodological tool to prioritize decision alternatives using multiple criteria. The prominent assessment criteria and intervention strategies were derived using a literature review, focus group discussion (n = 11), and a 2-round modified Delphi technique with specialists and experts involved in different stages of health policy-making (round 1: n = 50, round 2: n = 46). Then, the AHP was used to determine the weightage of the selected interventions and develop the decision-making model. The sensitivity analysis was performed to test the stability of the priority ranking.

Results

Nine alternative interventions were included in the final ranking based on eight assessment criteria. According to the results, the most priority interventions to prevent and control hypertension included reformulation of food products to contain less salt and changing the target levels of salt in foods and meals, providing low-sodium salt substitutes, and reducing salt intake through the implementation of front-of-package labeling (FOPL). The results of the sensitivity analysis and a comparison analysis suggested that the assessment model performed in this study had an appropriate level of robustness in selecting the best option among the proposed alternatives.

Conclusion

MCDM techniques offer a potentially valuable approach to rationally structuring the problem, along with the opportunity to make explicit the judgments used as part of the decision-making model. The findings of this study provide a preliminary evidence base to guide future decisions and reforms aiming to improve appropriate population-based interventions for tackling hypertension and other risk factors of NCDs.

Supporting rehabilitation stakeholders in making service delivery decisions: a rapid review of multi-criteria decision analysis methods

PURPOSE

This review aimed to synthesize knowledge about multi-criteria decision analysis methods for supporting rehabilitation service design and delivery decisions, including: (1) describing the use of these methods within rehabilitation, (2) identifying decision types that can be supported by these methods, (3) describing client and family involvement, and (4) identifying implementation considerations.

METHODS

We conducted a rapid review in collaboration with a knowledge partner, searching four databases for peer-reviewed articles reporting primary research. We extracted relevant data from included studies and synthesized it descriptively and with conventional content analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 717 records, of which 54 met inclusion criteria. Multi-criteria decision analysis methods were primarily used to understand the strength of clients' and clinicians' preferences (n = 44), and five focused on supporting decision making. Shared decision making with stakeholders was evident in only two studies. Clients and families were mostly engaged in data collection and sometimes in selecting the relevant criteria. Good practices for supporting external validity were inconsistently reported. Implementation considerations included managing cognitive complexity and offering authentic choices.

CONCLUSIONS

Multi-criteria decision analysis methods are promising for better understanding client and family preferences and priorities across rehabilitation professions, contexts, and caseloads. Further work is required to use these methods in shared decision making, for which increased use of qualitative methods and stakeholder engagement is recommended. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONMulti-criteria decision analysis methods are promising for evidence-based, shared decision making for rehabilitation.However, most studies to date have focused on estimating stakeholder preferences, not supporting shared decision making.Cognitive complexity and modelling authentic and realistic decision choices are major barriers to implementation.Stakeholder-engagement and qualitative methods are recommended to address these barriers.