The Study and Development of Quality of Life Operation Pattern at District Level, Muang Sisaket District, Sisaket Province

Abstract

This participatory action research (PAR) aimed to study and develop the District Health Board (DHB) operational model. Participants were DHB, subcommittees and representatives of local government agencies and health care service offices located in Muang Sisaket district. Research instruments were the interview form for exploring quality of life operational model at the district level and the evaluation form of UCCARE applying the criteria from Ministry of Public Health. In addition, qualitative data were collected via focus groups and in-depth interviews. Quantitative data were analyzed by descriptive statistics and qualitative data were analyzed by content analysis. The results revealed that:

1) The DHB operational model included the appointment of DHB committee coming from all local government agencies to participate in brainstorming, planning, developing, problem-solving and sharing benefits together. The committee set the meeting for organizing vision, analyzing problems and selecting quality of life issues. The vision of working process was “Achieving to Healthy City” targeting to be good health of people, good environment, good economy, good community and society. Working strategies included 5 aspects, covering zero waste, disease free, safety city, exercising and increasing income.

2) The performance assessment of DHB using UCCARE criteria found that all five issues were evaluated illustrating as passed at level 4 and higher, and improving in a better trend than last year. Additionally, there were more obvious outcomes of problem-solving.

3) The influent factors affecting the success of the quality of life operational model were coordinating and integrating working together in the provincial and district levels to be able to share human, financial and others supporting resources, having knowledge and various abilities of local people to be easy for developing their quality of lives, and also organizing strong and continue meetings for sharing data and monitoring tasks of the committee.

It could be suggested that DHB should have more channels to gain more information or problems from working sites that can be used to be a guideline for organizing or developing quality of life of people appropriately and beneficially. Furthermore, DHB should provide more opportunities for local community or civil society to be a host for actual participating and managing problem issues.