Jens Detollenaere

Do we reap what we sow? : exploring the association between the strength of European primary healthcare systems and inequity in unmet need

Access to healthcare is inequitably distributed across different socioeconomic groups. Several vulnerable groups experience barriers in accessing healthcare, compared to their more wealthier counterparts. In response to this, many countries use resources to strengthen their primary care (PC) system, because in many European countries PC is the first entry-point to the healthcare system and plays a central role in the coordination of patients through the healthcare system. However it is unclear whether this strengthening of PC leads to less inequity in access to the whole healthcare system. This study investigates the association between strength indicators of PC and inequity in unmet need by merging data from the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions database (2013) and the Primary Healthcare Activity Monitor for Europe (2010). The analyses reveal a significant association between the Gini coefficient for income inequality and inequity in unmet need. When the Gini coefficient of a country is one SD higher, the social inequity in unmet need in that particular country will be 4.960 higher. Furthermore, the accessibility and the workforce development of a country’s PC system is inverse associated with the social inequity of unmet need. More specifically, when the access- and workforce development indicator of a country PC system are one standard deviation higher, the inequity in unmet healthcare needs are respectively 2.200 and 4.951 lower. Therefore, policymakers should focus on reducing income inequality to tackle inequity in access, and strengthen PC (by increasing accessibility and better-developing its workforce) as this can influence inequity in unmet need.

Perceived discrimination In Primary Healthcare in Europe: evidence from the cross‐sectional QUALICOPC study

Recent figures show that discrimination in healthcare is still persistent in the European Union. Research has confirmed these results but focused mainly on the outcomes of perceived discrimination. Studies that take into account socioeconomic determinants of discrimination limit themselves to either ethnicity, income or education. This article explores the influence of several socioeconomic indicators (e.g. gender, age, income, education and ethnicity) on perceived discrimination in 30 European countries. Data from the QUALICOPC study were used. These data were collected between October 2011 and December 2013 in the participating countries. In total, 7183 GPs (general practitioners) and 61932 patients participated in the study, which had an average response rate of 74.1%. Data collection was co-ordinated by NIVEL (Dutch Institute for Research of Health Care). Bivariate binomial logistic regressions were used to estimate the impact of each socioeconomic indicator on perceived discrimination. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to estimate the unique effect of each indicator. Results indicate that in Europe, overall 7% of the respondents felt discriminated, ranging between 1.4% and 12.8% at the country level. With regard to socioeconomic determinants in perceived discrimination, income and age are both important indicators, with lower income groups and younger people having a higher chance to feel discriminated. In addition, we find significant influences of education, gender, age and ethnicity in several countries. In most countries, higher educated people, older people, women and the indigenous population appeared to feel less discriminated. In conclusion, perceived discrimination in healthcare is reported in almost all European countries, but there is large variation between European countries. A high prevalence of perceived discrimination within a country also does not imply a correlation between socioeconomic indicators and perceived discrimination.

Access, treatment and outcomes of care: a study of ethnic minorities in Europe

ObjectivesRecent research has shown that ethnic minorities still have less access to medical care and are less satisfied with the treatment they receive and the outcomes of the health care process. This article assesses how migrants in Europe experience access, treatment and outcomes in the European health care systems.MethodsData were obtained from the QUALICOPC study (Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe). Regression analyses were used to estimate the access, treatment and outcomes of care for ethnic minorities.ResultsIn several countries, migrants experience that the opening hours of their GP practice were too limited and indicate that the practice was too far away from their work or home (lower access). They are more likely to report negative patient–doctor communication and less continuity of care than native patients (worse treatment). In addition, they are less satisfied with the care they received and are more likely to postpone care (worse outcomes).ConclusionsIn general, migrants are still disadvantaged during the health care process. However, our results also indicate that satisfaction with the health care process improves for second-generation migrants in comparison with first-generation migrants.

Association between cultural distance and migrant self-rated health

We study whether migrant health in Europe is associated with the cultural distance between their host country and country of origin. To this end, we run multilevel regression models on data merging self-rated health and social background of ≥3800 migrants from the European Social Survey with an index of cultural distance based on country differences in values, norms and attitudes measured in the World Values Survey. We find that higher levels of cultural distance are associated with worse migrant health. This association is comparable in size with the negative association between health and female (compared with male) gender but less important than the association between health and education level. In addition, this association is less significant among second-generation than first-generation migrants.

The link between income inequality and health in Europe, adding strength dimensions of primary care to the equation

Income inequality has been clearly associated with reduced population health. A body of evidence suggests that a strong primary care system may mitigate this negative association. The aim of this study is to assess the strength of the primary care systems effect on the inverse association between income inequality and health in Europe. Health is operationalised using four cross-sectional outcomes: self-rated health, life expectancy, mental well-being, and infant mortality. Strength of the primary care system is measured using the framework of the Primary Health Care Activity Monitor Europe, and income inequality by the Gini coefficient. Multiple regression models with interaction terms were used. The results confirm that especially the structure and continuity dimension of primary care strength can buffer the inverse association between income inequality and health. European policymakers should therefore focus on strengthening primary care systems in order to reduce inequity in health.

Volunteering, income and health

Separate literatures have related volunteering to health gains and income gains. We study the association between volunteering, income and health within one statistical framework. A state-of-the-art mediation analysis is conducted on data concerning the health, volunteering and sociodemographic characteristics of 42926 individuals within 29 European countries. We find that volunteering is positively associated to self-rated health. This association is partially mediated by household income.

Patients' Financially Driven Delay of GP Visits: Is It Less Likely to Occur in Stronger Primary Care Systems?

Available evidence has suggested that strong primary care (PC) systems are associated with better outcomes. This study aims to investigate whether PC strength is specifically related to the prevalence of patients’ financially driven postponement of general practitioner (GP) care. Therefore, data from a cross-sectional multicountry study in 33 countries among GPs and their patients were analyzed using multilevel logistic regression modelling. According to the results, the variation between countries in the levels of patients’ postponement of seeking GP care for financial reasons was large. More than one third of these cross-country differences could be explained by characteristics of the health care system and the GP practices. In particular, PC systems with good accessibility and those systems that offer comprehensive care were associated with lower levels of financially driven delay. Consequently, we can conclude that well-organized PC systems can compensate for the negative influence of individual characteristics (socioeconomic position) on the care-seeking behaviors of patients.