RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      정책 전문가의 인식을 통해 본 한국 보건의료정책 거버넌스: 신포괄수가제 사례에 관한 심층면접 결과 = Policy Elites` Perception of Health Policy Governance Findings from In-depth Interviews of Korean New Diagnosis Related Group Payment

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A102062995

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      Background: Engaging and Involving stakeholders who have different interests in changing health care policies are difficult task. As the literature on the governance in Korean health care field is rare, this study aims to provide empirical evidence of ‘governing health policy’-the ways health care policy is made, implemented, and evaluated from a political perspective. Methods: The authors of this study conducted interviews with elites in policy and clinical areas, which was considered to be the most effective approach to gather in-depth information about the background of changing payment policy as well as the barriers or contributors for making the policy sustainable. A total of 14 experts (3 government officials, 2 representatives from medical profession, 3 professors form academic field, and 6 healthcare providers from New DRG pilot program hospitals) participated in 2 hour long interviews. Results: There was a perception gap of the feasibility and substantiality of new payment system among elites. The score was higher in government officers than those in scholars or clinical experts. Next, the interviewees indicated that Korean New DRG might not sustain without significant efforts to improving democratic aspects of the governance. It is also notable that all interviewees except healthcare providers provided negative expectation of the contribution of new payment system to increase administration efficiency. For clinical efficiency, every stakeholders perceived there was no increased efficiency after introduction of New DRG payment. Like general perception, there was a wide gap between the perception of stakeholders in quality change after implementing the new payment system. Finally, interview participants negatively assumed about the likelihood of New DRG to remain a case of successful reforms. Conclusion: This study implied the importance of social consensus and the governance of health policy.
      번역하기

      Background: Engaging and Involving stakeholders who have different interests in changing health care policies are difficult task. As the literature on the governance in Korean health care field is rare, this study aims to provide empirical evidence of...

      Background: Engaging and Involving stakeholders who have different interests in changing health care policies are difficult task. As the literature on the governance in Korean health care field is rare, this study aims to provide empirical evidence of ‘governing health policy’-the ways health care policy is made, implemented, and evaluated from a political perspective. Methods: The authors of this study conducted interviews with elites in policy and clinical areas, which was considered to be the most effective approach to gather in-depth information about the background of changing payment policy as well as the barriers or contributors for making the policy sustainable. A total of 14 experts (3 government officials, 2 representatives from medical profession, 3 professors form academic field, and 6 healthcare providers from New DRG pilot program hospitals) participated in 2 hour long interviews. Results: There was a perception gap of the feasibility and substantiality of new payment system among elites. The score was higher in government officers than those in scholars or clinical experts. Next, the interviewees indicated that Korean New DRG might not sustain without significant efforts to improving democratic aspects of the governance. It is also notable that all interviewees except healthcare providers provided negative expectation of the contribution of new payment system to increase administration efficiency. For clinical efficiency, every stakeholders perceived there was no increased efficiency after introduction of New DRG payment. Like general perception, there was a wide gap between the perception of stakeholders in quality change after implementing the new payment system. Finally, interview participants negatively assumed about the likelihood of New DRG to remain a case of successful reforms. Conclusion: This study implied the importance of social consensus and the governance of health policy.

      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 조승현, "협력적 로컬거버넌스의 성공요인에 관한 연구 - 진안군 도화동산조성 사례를 중심으로 -" 한국자치행정학회 23 (23): 503-525, 2009

      2 정미애, "한일관계에서 시민사회의 역할과 뉴거버넌스" 국제지역연구원 18 (18): 17-41, 2011

      3 박호진, "한국 개원의사들에서 의학전문직업성의 의미" 대한의사협회 54 (54): 1154-1163, 2011

      4 조동오, "한·중 황해거버넌스에 관한 고찰" 해양환경안전학회 19 (19): 186-192, 2013

      5 문태현, "지역혁신을 위한 문화정책거버넌스의 성공요인분석- 안동국제탈춤페스티벌 집행위원회를 중심으로 -" 한국정부학회 17 (17): 337-358, 2005

      6 황순기, "지역보건의료 거버넌스 구축방안" 한국지방정부학회 16 (16): 137-161, 2013

      7 김인, "지방정부의 공공서비스 전달에 있어서 거버넌스 구조가 성과에 미치는 영향: 서비스 유형별 비교분석" 한국행정학회 40 (40): 51-75, 2006

      8 전영상, "지방자치단체 공무원의 로컬 거버넌스 인식 구조 분석:충주시와 홍천군 공무원을 중심으로" 한국지방자치학회 25 (25): 117-143, 2013

      9 강형기, "일본의 중앙지방관계 변화와지방재정의 자기책임성- 유바리(夕張)시의 재정파탄과 한국 지방정부에의 교훈 -" 한국지방자치학회 20 (20): 23-47, 2008

      10 윤성호, "이명박 정부의 저출산 대응과 차기정부의 과제 - 아동돌봄 정책을 중심으로 -" 한국자치행정학회 26 (26): 183-200, 2012

      1 조승현, "협력적 로컬거버넌스의 성공요인에 관한 연구 - 진안군 도화동산조성 사례를 중심으로 -" 한국자치행정학회 23 (23): 503-525, 2009

      2 정미애, "한일관계에서 시민사회의 역할과 뉴거버넌스" 국제지역연구원 18 (18): 17-41, 2011

      3 박호진, "한국 개원의사들에서 의학전문직업성의 의미" 대한의사협회 54 (54): 1154-1163, 2011

      4 조동오, "한·중 황해거버넌스에 관한 고찰" 해양환경안전학회 19 (19): 186-192, 2013

      5 문태현, "지역혁신을 위한 문화정책거버넌스의 성공요인분석- 안동국제탈춤페스티벌 집행위원회를 중심으로 -" 한국정부학회 17 (17): 337-358, 2005

      6 황순기, "지역보건의료 거버넌스 구축방안" 한국지방정부학회 16 (16): 137-161, 2013

      7 김인, "지방정부의 공공서비스 전달에 있어서 거버넌스 구조가 성과에 미치는 영향: 서비스 유형별 비교분석" 한국행정학회 40 (40): 51-75, 2006

      8 전영상, "지방자치단체 공무원의 로컬 거버넌스 인식 구조 분석:충주시와 홍천군 공무원을 중심으로" 한국지방자치학회 25 (25): 117-143, 2013

      9 강형기, "일본의 중앙지방관계 변화와지방재정의 자기책임성- 유바리(夕張)시의 재정파탄과 한국 지방정부에의 교훈 -" 한국지방자치학회 20 (20): 23-47, 2008

      10 윤성호, "이명박 정부의 저출산 대응과 차기정부의 과제 - 아동돌봄 정책을 중심으로 -" 한국자치행정학회 26 (26): 183-200, 2012

      11 곽진영, "의료정책의 거버넌스: 의약분업정책을 중심으로" 한국정당학회 9 (9): 149-181, 2010

      12 유태규, "의료관광 선도국의 보건의료시스템의 거버넌스 구축형태 - B. Guy Peters의 4가지 정부모형을 중심으로-" 한국공공관리학회 23 (23): 257-280, 2009

      13 김도희, "울산지역 로컬 거버넌스(Local Governance)의 성과와 한계:주민참여예산제와 주민배심원제의 정책사례를 중심으로" 한국정책학회 15 (15): 131-158, 2006

      14 변진옥, "약국약사들의 사회적 역할 실천에 대한 근거이론적 접근" 한국보건사회학회 (35) : 107-144, 2014

      15 백한주, "신(新)의료전문가주의" 대한류마티스학회 19 (19): 316-325, 2012

      16 이숙종, "사회자본이 거버넌스 형성에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구: 공무원과 시민단체 직원의 인식을 중심으로" 한국행정학회 42 (42): 149-170, 2008

      17 양기용, "사회서비스 공급체계변화와 공공성: 지역사회서비스 거버넌스를 중심으로" 한국공공관리학회 27 (27): 89-114, 2013

      18 배응환, "로컬거버넌스: 갈등에서 협력으로" 한국지방행정연구원 19 (19): 187-216, 2005

      19 라미경, "거버넌스, NGO, 그리고 지역사회를 중심으로" 한국거버넌스학회 13 (13): 227-254, 2006

      20 정성호, "거버넌스 위기가 지방공사 부채에 미치는 영향" 한국행정연구원 20 (20): 125-161, 2011

      21 Finkelstein L, "What is global governance?" 1 (1): 367-372, 1995

      22 The King’s Fund, "What is clinical governance?" Briefings 1999

      23 Frechette L, "What do we mean by global governance?" Overseas Development Institute 1998

      24 Kim SJ, "Understanding governance" Dae young Co. Press 2002

      25 Kudrle, R, "Three types of globalization: communications, market, and direct, In Globalization and global governance" Rowman & Littlefield 127-149, 1999

      26 Kim CY, "Theory of health security" Han-ul Academy Press 2009

      27 Choi SW, "The research trend of governance in Korea: a critical review from new governance perspective" 10 : 111-125, 2003

      28 Rhodes R, "The new governance: governing without government" 44 (44): 652-667, 1996

      29 Kim JY, "The future of government for the governance: new public management and policy network" 34 (34): 21-39, 2000

      30 Scally G, "The NHS’s 50 anniversary. Clinical governance and the drive for quality improvement in the new NHS in England" 317 (317): 61-65, 1998

      31 Shepsle KA, "Studying institutions: some lessons from the rational choice approach" 1 (1): 131-147, 1989

      32 Joseph RA, "State, conflict, and democracy in Africa" Lynne Reinner 1999

      33 Jung YD, "Seeking for Korean governance paradigm: governance and state capacity" 2005

      34 Korean Medical Association, "Resolution rally for anti-DRG introduction"

      35 Freidson E, "Professionalism: the third logic" Polity 2001

      36 Bok MS, "Partnership in governance era and reflection upon the regional NGOs" 12 (12): 25-51, 2005

      37 Kim KW, "Partnership and effective state administration" Beobmoomsa Press 2000

      38 Lovan WR, "Participatory governance in changing world, In Participatory governance: planning, conflict mediation and public decision-making in civil society" Ashgate Publising 1-21, 2004

      39 Jung YH, "On the governance of health care" 131 : 110-119, 2007

      40 Miller WL, "Models of local governance: public opinion and political theory in Britain" Palgrave 2000

      41 Goss S, "Making local governance work: networks, relationships, and the management of change" Palgrave 2001

      42 Shin HJ, "Local governance of medical and health sector in developing country: focus on the Philippines and Zambia" 6 (6): 93-112, 2002

      43 Scott WR, "Institutions and organizations" Sage 2001

      44 Davis KE, "Indicators as a technology of global governance" 46 (46): 71-104, 2012

      45 You JW, "Hierarchy, market, network: an empirical analysis of governance of ward office in Seoul" 3 (3): 191-213, 2008

      46 Olafsdottir AE, "Health systems performance in sub-Saharan Africa: governance, outcome and equity" 11 : 237-, 2011

      47 Savedoff WD, "Governing mandatory health insurance: learning from experience" The World Bank 2008

      48 Kjaer AM, "Governance. Malden" Polity Press 2004

      49 Pierre J, "Governance, politics and the state" Palgrave Macmillan 2000

      50 Savedoff WD, "Governance in the health sector: a strategy for measuring determinants and performance" Social Insight 2009

      51 World Health Organization, "Governance for health in the 21st century: a study conducted for the WHO Regional Office for Europe" World Health Organization 2011

      52 Lee HC, "Governance and NGOs: a case study of the new drug prescription system, the separation of pharmacy and dispensary" 35 (35): 217-236, 2001

      53 Kim EY, "Governance and NGO in national health insurance sector" 6 : 67-96, 2003

      54 Andrews M, "Good government means different things in different countries" 23 (23): 7-35, 2010

      55 Brinkerhoff DW, "Good governance and health: assessing progress in Rwanda. TWUBAKANE Decentralization and Health Program Rwanda Report" IntraHealth International 2009

      56 Buse K, "Global public-private health partnerships: part II, what are the health issues for global governance?" 78 (78): 699-709, 2000

      57 Ng NY, "Global health governance at a crossroads" 3 (3): 1-37, 2011

      58 Siddiqi S, "Framework for assessing governance of the health system in developing countries: gateway to good governance" 90 : 13-25, 2009

      59 Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, "Financing global health 2010: development assistance and country spending in economic uncertainty" Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington 2010

      60 World Health Organization, "Everybody’s business: strengthening health systems to improve health outcomes: WHO’s framework for action" World Health Organization 2007

      61 Busse R, "Diagnosis-related groups in Europe: moving towards transparency, efficiency and quality in hospitals" Open University Press 2011

      62 Hirst P, "Democracy and governance, In Debating governance: authority, steering, and democracy" Oxford University Press 2000

      63 Boyce C, "Conducting in-depth interviews: a guide for designing and conducting in-depth interviews for evaluation input"

      64 Crinson I, "Clinical governance: the new NHS, new responsibilities?" 8 (8): 449-453, 1999

      65 Paris JA, "Clinical governance for public health professionals" 21 : 430-434, 1999

      66 Butterworth T, "Clinical governance and clinical supervision: working together to ensure safe and accountable practice" School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting, University of Manchester 1999

      67 Wilson J, "Clinical governance" 7 (7): 987-988, 1998

      68 Goodman NW, "Clinical governance" 317 (317): 1725-1727, 1998

      69 Korean Intern Resident Association, "Best practicing is die"

      70 Fidler DP, "Architecture amidst Anarchy: global health’s quest for governance" 1 (1): 1-17, 2007

      71 Hewson M, "Approaches to global governance theory" State University of New York Press 1999

      72 Kim SJ, "An institutional and ecological analysis of the healthcare environment in Korea: focus on institutional logic, actors, governance" 21 (21): 457-492, 2011

      73 Mikkelsen-Lopez I, "An approach to addressing governance from a health system framework perspective" 11 : 13-, 2011

      74 Tang S, "An agenda for the study of collaborative governance" 2008

      75 Jung YH, "A study on the governance of non-profit health care organizations in selected countries" 149 : 116-129, 2009

      76 Jin YC, "A study of health care governance in Korea: focus on national health insurance" 2006

      77 Feachem R, "A moment of truth for global health" 340 : 2869-, 2010

      78 Department of Health, "A first class service: quality in the new NHS" Department of Health 1998

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2027 평가예정 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
      2021-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
      2018-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2015-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2013-03-11 학회명변경 영문명 : The Korean Society Of Health Policy And Administration -> Korean Academy of Health Policy and Management KCI등재
      2013-03-11 학술지명변경 외국어명 : Korean Journal of Health Policy and Administration -> Health Policy and Mangemnet KCI등재
      2011-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2009-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2007-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2004-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      2003-01-01 평가 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2002-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      1999-07-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 0.78 0.78 0.8
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      0.81 0.78 1.372 0.12
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼