首页> 外文期刊>Online Journal of Rural Nursing and Health Care >Diverse Stakeholder Perspectives on Rural Health Care Reform in a U.S. State That Rejected the Affordable Care Act: A Case Study
【24h】

Diverse Stakeholder Perspectives on Rural Health Care Reform in a U.S. State That Rejected the Affordable Care Act: A Case Study

机译:利益相关者对美国拒绝《平价医疗法案》的农村医疗改革的观点:一个案例研究

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Purpose: This case study identifies rural health care stakeholder perspectives on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and describes the health policy context in Idaho, the only state in the United States to reject Medicaid expansion yet develop a state-run health insurance exchange. Sample: The sample included 20 rural health care stakeholders, including clinicians, elected officials, state agency administrators, health care facility administrators, and interest group leaders. Method: A single-case study of stakeholder perspectives on the ACA and rural health care access in Idaho was conducted from 2014 to 2016. Data sources include qualitative interviews with 20 rural health care stakeholders and public documents relating to the ACA and rural health care from Idaho governmental and nongovernmental entities’ websites. Findings: Since the 2010 passage of the ACA, opposition to “Obamacare” became associated with a conservative stance on health care reform. However, in this case study, diverse health care stakeholders who criticized aspects of the ACA identified several components of the policy, including Medicaid expansion, as essential in ensuring access to rural health care. Some stakeholders called for federal legislation authorizing nurse practitioners to practice as independent primary care providers. However, the politics of medical sovereignty present challenges to this relevant strategy and to full implementation of Idaho’s Nurse Practice Act for increasing access to primary care in a rural state. Conclusions: The case study approach can be effective?in illuminating stakeholder perspectives and policy strategies that?may fall outside?of polarized health care policy debates. Examination of the state-level political context of rural health care must consider concurrent battles about state sovereignty over health care policy and professional-clinical battles about sovereignty over primary care.
机译:目的:本案例研究确定了农村医疗保健利益相关者对《平价医疗法案》(ACA)的看法,并描述了爱达荷州的医疗政策背景,爱达荷州是美国唯一拒绝医疗补助扩张但发展了州立医疗保险交易所的州。样本:样本包括20个农村医疗保健利益相关者,包括临床医生,民选官员,州机构管理员,医疗机构管理员和利益集团负责人。方法:2014年至2016年,在爱达荷州进行了利益相关者对ACA和农村医疗保健获取观点的单例研究。数据来源包括对20个农村医疗保健利益相关者的定性访谈,以及与ACA和农村保健相关的公共文件。爱达荷州政府和非政府实体的网站。调查结果:自ACA于2010年通过以来,对“奥巴马医改”的反对与对医疗改革的保守立场联系在一起。但是,在本案例研究中,对ACA的各个方面提出批评的多样化的医疗保健利益相关者将政策的几个组成部分(包括医疗补助扩大)确定为确保获得农村医疗保健的必要条件。一些利益相关者呼吁联邦立法授权护士从业人员作为独立的初级保健提供者行医。但是,医疗主权政治对这一相关战略以及爱达荷州《护士执业法案》的全面实施提出了挑战,这些法案旨在增加农村地区获得初级保健的机会。结论:案例研究方法可以有效地阐明利益相关者的观点和政策策略,而这可能不在两极分化的医疗政策辩论中。检验农村医疗保健的州级政治背景必须考虑到有关国家对医疗保健政策的主权之争和有关临床对初级保健主权之临床斗争。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号