4.4 Article

Policy and planning of prevention in Italy: Results from an appraisal of prevention plans developed by Regions for the period 2010-2012

期刊

HEALTH POLICY
卷 119, 期 6, 页码 760-769

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.03.012

关键词

Health policy; Prevention; Italy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Health policies on disease prevention differ widely between countries. Studies suggest that different countries have much to learn from each other and that significant health gains could be achieved if all countries followed best practice. This paper describes the policy development and planning process relating to prevention activities in Italy, through a critical appraisal of Regional Prevention Plans (RPPs) drafted for the period 2010-2012. The analysis was performed using a specific evaluation tool developed by a Scientific Committee appointed by the Italian Ministry of Health. We appraised nineteen RPPs, comprising a total of 702 projects, most of them in the areas of universal prevention (62.9%) and prevention in high risk groups (27.0%). Italian Regions established prevention activities using an innovative combination of population and high-risk individuals approaches. However, some issues, such as the need to reduce health inequalities, were poorly addressed. The technical drafting of RPPs required some improvement; e.g. the evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the health interventions proposed was seldom reported. There were significant geographical differences across the Regions in the appraisal of RPPs. Our research suggests that continuous assessment of the planning process of prevention may become a very useful tool for monitoring, and ultimately strengthening, public health capacity in the field of prevention. Further research is needed to analyze determinants of regional variation. (C) 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据