华南预防医学 ›› 2024, Vol. 50 ›› Issue (11): 1001-1004.doi: 10.12183/j.scjpm.2024.1001

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

应用德尔菲法构建广东省预防接种异常反应保险补偿评价指标体系

胡培, 赵占杰, 李佳玲, 梁文佳, 谢莘, 孙立梅, 邓惠鸿   

  1. 广东省疾病预防控制中心,广东 广州 511430
  • 收稿日期:2024-04-25 出版日期:2024-11-20 发布日期:2024-12-04
  • 通讯作者: 邓惠鸿,E-mail:jknature@21cn.com
  • 作者简介:胡培(1986—),男,硕士研究生,主管医师,主要从事疫苗可预防疾病防控与不良反应监测评价工作
  • 基金资助:
    广东省医学科研基金项目(C2019053)

Development of an evaluation index system for insurance compensation for vaccine adverse events in Guangdong Province by Delphi method

HU Pei, ZHAO Zhanjie, LI Jialing, LIANG Wenjia, XIE Xin, SUN Limei, DENG Huihong   

  1. Guangdong Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Guangzhou, Guangdong 511430, China
  • Received:2024-04-25 Online:2024-11-20 Published:2024-12-04

摘要: 目的 为广东省预防接种异常反应保险补偿工作建立评价指标体系。方法 通过文献分析和参考其他试点地区及其他类似保险产品政策文件初步拟定指标体系,并利用德尔菲法通过3轮调查问卷采集专家评分进行指标筛选,采用百分权重法计算各指标的权重。结果 共24名专家参加调查评估,其中来自国家与省级疾控中心7名,省级卫生行政部门5名,高等院校12名;正高级职称9名,副高级职称8名,中级职称7名。专业领域涉及流行病学9名,卫生政策7名,保险学6名,药学及卫生毒理学各1名。3轮评估专家的参与度分别为95.80%、100.00%、95.80%。专家权威系数平均0.79,其中专家判断系数平均0.76,熟悉程度系数平均0.82。经过3轮专家咨询,构建了包含5个一级指标(试点结果、事前规划、事中执行、事后总结分析和保障工作)、12个二级指标(投保数量、政策制定、保险资金筹集等)、34个三级指标(疫苗企业投保数、受种方投保数、政策完整性等)的广东省预防接种异常反应保险补偿评价指标体系。结论 本研究建立的评价指标体系专家意见权威程度、协调程度均较高,可用于广东省预防接种异常反应保险补偿工作的具体评价。

关键词: 预防接种异常反应, 保险, 补偿, 评价体系, 德尔菲法

Abstract: Objective To establish an evaluation index system for insurance compensation for vaccine adverse events in Guangdong Province. Methods The index system was initially formulated by referring to literature review and policy documents of other pilot regions and other similar insurance products, and the indicators were selected by collecting experts' scores through three rounds of questionnaires using the Delphi method, and the weights of each indicator were calculated using the percentage weighting method. Results A total of 24 experts participated in the survey evaluation, including 7 experts from national and provincial CDCs, 5 experts from provincial health administration departments, and 12 experts from higher education institutions; 9 experts with senior titles, 8 experts with associate titles, and 7 others. The areas of expertise involved epidemiology (n=9), health policy (n=7), insurance (n=6), pharmacology (n=1), and health toxicology (n=1). The participation rate of experts in the three rounds was 95.80%, 100.00%, and 95.80%, respectively. The average coefficient of expert authority was 0.79, among which the average coefficient of expert judgment was 0.76 and the average coefficient of familiarity was 0.82. Following three rounds of expert consultations, an evaluation index system for insurance compensation for vaccine adverse events in Guangdong Province was established, which included five primary indicators (pilot results, pre-planning, implementation, post-analysis, and support work), 12 secondary indicators (number of insured, policy formulation, insurance fund raising, etc.), and 34 tertiary indicators (number of insured vaccine companies, number of insured persons vaccinated, policy integrity, etc.). Conclusion The evaluation index system established in this study has a high degree of authority and coordination of expert opinions, and can be used for the specific evaluation of the work on compensation insurance for vaccine adverse events in Guangdong Province.

Key words: Vaccine adverse event, Insurance, Compensation, Evaluation system, Delphi method

中图分类号: 

  • R186