IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ijhplm/v36y2021i5p1830-1846.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identification of public health priorities, barriers, and solutions for Kuwait using the modified Delphi method for stakeholder consensus

Author

Listed:
  • Janvier Gasana
  • Harri Vainio
  • Joseph Longenecker
  • Tom Loney
  • Balázs Ádám
  • Mustafa Al‐Zoughool

Abstract

The rapid modernization and economic developments in Kuwait, have been accompanied by substantial lifestyle changes such as unhealthy diet and physical inactivity. These modifiable behaviours have contributed to increased rates of non‐communicable diseases including diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. Delphi Consensus Method was implemented in the current study to draw stakeholders from all sectors together to develop a consensus on the major public health priorities, barriers and solutions. The process involves administration of a series of questions to selected stakeholders through an iterative process that ends when a consensus has been reached among participants. Results of the iteration process identified obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases along with lack of enforcement of laws and regulation as priority health issues. Results also identified lack of national vision for the development of a public health system, lack of multidisciplinary research investigating sources of disease and methods of prevention and improving efficiency with existing resources in implementation and efficiency as the main barriers identified were. Solutions suggested included investing in healthcare prevention, strengthening communication between all involved sectors through intersectoral collaboration, awareness at the primary healthcare setting and use of electronic health records. The results offer an important opportunity for stakeholders in Kuwait to tackle these priority health issues employing the suggested approaches and solution.

Suggested Citation

  • Janvier Gasana & Harri Vainio & Joseph Longenecker & Tom Loney & Balázs Ádám & Mustafa Al‐Zoughool, 2021. "Identification of public health priorities, barriers, and solutions for Kuwait using the modified Delphi method for stakeholder consensus," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 1830-1846, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ijhplm:v:36:y:2021:i:5:p:1830-1846
    DOI: 10.1002/hpm.3270
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.3270
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/hpm.3270?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Culyer, Anthony J., 2016. "Cost-effectiveness thresholds in health care: a bookshelf guide to their meaning and use," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(4), pages 415-432, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Javad Moradpour & Aidan Hollis, 2021. "The economic theory of cost‐effectiveness thresholds in health: Domestic and international implications," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 1139-1151, May.
    2. Siverskog, Jonathan & Henriksson, Martin, 2022. "The health cost of reducing hospital bed capacity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    3. Jessica Ochalek & Karl Claxton & Paul Revill & Mark Sculpher & Alexandra Rollinger, 2016. "Supporting the development of an essential health package: principles and initial assessment for Malawi," Working Papers 136cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    4. Markiewicz Olimpia, 2021. "Value of Life Year and Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds: The Case of Poland," Central European Economic Journal, Sciendo, vol. 8(55), pages 256-268, January.
    5. Sabrina Storgaard Sørensen & Kjeld Møller Pedersen & Ulla Møller Weinreich & Lars Ehlers, 2017. "Economic Evaluation of Community-Based Case Management of Patients Suffering From Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 413-424, June.
    6. Jessica Ochalek & Miqdad Asaria & Pei Fen Chuar & James Lomas & Sumit Mazumdar & Karl Claxton, 2019. "Assessing health opportunity costs for the Indian health care systems," Working Papers 161cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    7. Saranda Bajraktari & Marlene Sandlund & Beatrice Pettersson & Erik Rosendahl & Magnus Zingmark, 2024. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of the digital fall preventive intervention Safe Step among community-dwelling older people aged 70 and older," European Journal of Ageing, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 1-10, December.
    8. Daniel Howdon & James Lomas, 2017. "Pricing implications of non-marginal budgetary impacts in health technology assessment: a conceptual model," Working Papers 148cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    9. James Love-Koh & Susan Griffin & Edward Kataika & Paul Revill & Sibusiso Sibandze & Simon Walker & Jessica Ochalek & Mark Sculpher & Matthias Arnold, 2019. "Economic analysis for health benefits package design," Working Papers 165cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    10. Mattias Neyt, 2018. "Value-Based Pricing: Do Not Throw Away the Baby with the Bath Water," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 1-3, January.
    11. Haru Iino & Masayuki Hashiguchi & Satoko Hori, 2022. "Estimating the range of incremental cost-effectiveness thresholds for healthcare based on willingness to pay and GDP per capita: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-17, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ijhplm:v:36:y:2021:i:5:p:1830-1846. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0749-6753 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.