Redecin Brazil: constructing the methodology of a multicentric study to evaluate the care network for people with disabilities

Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Citações na Scopus
4
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2021
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
UNIV ESTADUAL PAULISTA-UNESP
Autores
RIBEIRO, Katia Suely Queiroz Silva
RAMOS, Barbara Grazielle
FERRARI, Fernando Pierette
SALDANHA, Jorge Henrique Santos
SILVA, Silvia Lanziotti Azevedo da
FERNANDES, Tiotrefis Gomes
Citação
INTERFACE-COMUNICACAO SAUDE EDUCACAO, v.25, article ID e200767, 16p, 2021
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
This article presents the methodological path of the Redecin study - Evaluation of the Implementation of the Care Network for People with Disabilities (RCPCD) in Brazil. We conducted a multicentric cross-sectional study adopting a hybrid design involving quantitative instruments (document analysis and structured questionnaires) and qualitative methods (interviews with key informants about the implementation of the RCPCD). After discussions with informants from the Ministry of Health and research group, a health region/macro region configuration was adopted, involving all the components of the RCPCD described in the Ministerial Order that created the network. The study was shown to be representative in eight states in the country's five geographical regions. The use of a hybrid design and multiple evidence sources, and the incorporation of the concept of health care network were fundamental to structuring the evaluation as an instrument that aims to support health care decision-making processes.
Palavras-chave
People with disabilities, Rehabilitation, Public health policies, Health evaluation, Brazilian National Health System
Referências
  1. Almeida Ana Maria Freire de Lima, 2019, Cad. saúde colet., V27, P73, DOI 10.1590/1414-462x201900010365
  2. [Anonymous], 2013, US ICF PRACT MAN US
  3. Associacao Brasileira de Saude Coletiva, 1994, DISSEMINACAO INFORM DISSEMINACAO INFORM, P27
  4. Azevedo DM, 2013, REV ENFERM UFPE, V7, P5015, DOI [10.5205/reuol.4700-39563-1, DOI 10.5205/REUOL.4700-39563-1]
  5. Bardin L, 2016, ANALISE CONTEUDO, VVolume 1
  6. Brasil. Senado Federal. Constituicao, 1988, CONSTITUICAO REPUBLI
  7. Campos MF, 2015, INTERFACE-BOTUCATU, V19, P207, DOI 10.1590/1807-57622014.0078
  8. Contandriopoulos AP, 2011, AVALIACAO CONCEITOS, P217
  9. Cruz MM, 2015, CAMINHOS ANALISE POL, P285
  10. Denis J, 1997, AVALIACAO SAUDE MODE AVALIACAO SAUDE MODE, P49
  11. Dubow Camila, 2018, Saúde debate, V42, P455, DOI 10.1590/0103-1104201811709
  12. Escarce AG, 2017, DISTURB COMUM, V29, P772
  13. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatistica-IBGE, 2018, CENS DEM 2010 NOT TE CENS DEM 2010 NOT TE
  14. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatistica-IBGE, 2013, PESQ NAC SAUD 2013 PESQ NAC SAUD 2013
  15. de Lima MLLT, 2013, EPIDEMIOL SERV SAUDE, V22, P597, DOI 10.5123/S1679-49742013000400006
  16. Machado WCA, 2018, TEXTO CONTEXTO ENFER, V27, P1
  17. Magalhaes Junior HM, 2014, DIVULG SAUDE DEBATE, P15
  18. Mattos RA, 2015, CAMINHOS ANALISE POL, P403
  19. Minayo MCS, 2010, AVALIACAO TRIANGULAC, V3a
  20. de Barros FBM, 2008, CIENC SAUDE COLETIVA, V13, P941, DOI 10.1590/S1413-81232008000300016
  21. Silveira Filho Roberto Moreira, 2016, Physis, V26, P853, DOI 10.1590/s0103-73312016000300008
  22. Tanaka OY, 2017, AVALIACAO SAUDE CONT, P1
  23. Viera CS, 2019, REV ESC ENFERM USP, V53, DOI [10.1590/s1980-220x2017039303408, 10.1590/S1980-220X2017039303408]
  24. Wisdom JP, 2012, HEALTH SERV RES, V47, P721, DOI 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2011.01344.x
  25. Yin RK, 2015, ESTUDO CASO PLANEJAM