Exploring the challenges of the Iranian parliament about passing laws for resource allocation in healthcare
A qualitative study
Keywords:
Legislation, Resource allocation, Healthcare, Parliament, IranAbstract
Background: Awareness about the process of law making and the factors that affect the legislative process have an important role in improving legislations that are approved by parliaments.
Objective: This study aimed to explore and analyze the process of development and enactment of law in Iran’s parliament, and factors that might affect the enactment of laws that are related to the allocation and distribution of health sector resources in Iran.
Methods: In this case study, data were collected through review of literature and national documents, and experts’ interviews. Interviews were performed with selected members of parliament (MPs), ex members of parliament and professionals from the Ministry of Health and Medical Education (MOHME) (15 persons). MAX QDA 10 was used for coding and constructing themes. Data were analyzed in five steps (familiarization, developing a conceptual framework, coding, indexing, and interpretation) using a content analysis with inductive and deductive approaches.
Results: The main factors that could affect the approval and enactment of legislations related to allocation of healthcare resources in the Iranian parliament were categorized in seven themes including: Importance of issue, resource availability, legislator’s awareness about the topic, lobbying and unofficial relations with influential officials, mentioning strong reasons by MOHME, weakness of previous laws, and positive feedback related to the same laws.
Conclusion: Although the process of law making in parliament, and implementation of them in health organizations have legal stages, the study showed that several key factors affect this trend. In fact, it is suggested the health policy makers and MPs consider extending a range of factors to improve the process of law making and the efficiency of legislation related to allocation of healthcare resources.
References
Kapiriri L, Norheim OF, Heggenhougen K. Using burden of disease information for health planning in
developing countries: the experience from Uganda. Soc Sci Med. 2003; 56(12): 2433-41. PMID: 12742606.
Landwehr C, Klinnert D. Value congruence in health care priority setting: social values, institutions and
decisions in three countries. Health Econ Policy Law. 2015; 10(02): 113-32. doi:
1017/S1744133114000437. PMID: 25434454.
Rubinstein A, Pichon-Riviere A, Augustovski F. Development and implementation of health technology
assessment in Argentina: Two steps forward and one step back. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;
(S1): 260-9. doi: 10.1017/S0266462309090734. PMID: 19527545.
Abstracts from the Society for Clinical Trials Annual Meeting, Miami, May 21–23, 2012. Clinical Trials.
; 9(4): 450-554. doi: 10.1177/1740774512453224.
Defechereux T, Paolucci F, Mirelman A, Youngkong S, Botten G, Hagen TP, et al. Health care priority
setting in Norway a multicriteria decision analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012; 12: 39. doi:
1186/1472-6963-12-39. PMID: 22335815, PMCID: PMC3312861.
Waldau S, Lindholm L, Wiechel AH. Priority setting in practice: Participants opinions on vertical and
horizontal priority setting for reallocation. Health policy. 2010; 96(3): 245-54. doi:
1016/j.healthpol.2010.02.007.
Gibson JL, Martin DK, Singer PA. Priority setting in hospitals: Fairness, inclusiveness, and the problem of
institutional power differences. Soc Sci Med. 2005; 61(11): 2355-62. doi:
1016/j.socscimed.2005.04.037. PMID: 15950347.
Iranian Constitution. Available from: http://www.iranonline.com/iran/iraninfo/government/constitution.htm.
Government of Islamic Republic of Iran. Civil Service Management Law. Media portal of Government of
Islamic Republic of Iran. Available from: http://www.dolat.ir
Tuckett AG. Qualitative research sampling: the very real complexities. Nurse Res. 2004; 12(1): 47-61. doi:
7748/nr2004.07.12.1.47.c5930. PMID: 15493214.
Miller GJ, Robbins D. Progressive Government Budgeting. Handbook of Governmental Accounting. 2008:
Landers SH, Sehgal AR. Health care lobbying in the United States. Am J Med. 2004; 116(7): 474-7. doi:
1016/j.amjmed.2003.10.037. PMID: 15047037.
Terry V. Lobbying: Fantasy, reality or both? A health care public policy case study. Journal of Public
Affairs. 2001; 1(3): 266-80. doi: 10.1002/pa.72.
West DM, Heith D, Goodwin C. Harry and Louise go to Washington: political advertising and health care
reform. J Health Polit Policy Law. 1996; 21(1): 35-68. doi: 10.1215/03616878-21-1-35. PMID: 8708342.
Tourani S, Maleki MR, Hadian M, Amiresmaili MR. A survey on present status of health services priority
setting in Iran. Payesh. 2011; 2: 217-30.
Davies E. How big is the US healthcare lobby? BMJ. 2013; 347: f7366. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f7366. PMID:
Parliament of Islamic Republic of Iran. The budget plan of 2005, Parliament of Islamic Republic of Iran,
August 18, 2015. Available from: http://hbi.ir
Islamic Parliament Research Center. The budget plan of 2014, Islamic Parliament Research Center of The
Islamic Republic Of IRAN, Available from: http://rc.majlis.ir/fa.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 KNOWLEDGE KINGDOM PUBLISHING
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
