Willemijn Schäfer

Assessing the potential for improvement of primary care in 34 countries: a cross-sectional survey

Abstract Objective To investigate patients’ perceptions of improvement potential in primary care in 34 countries. Methods We did a cross-sectional survey of 69 201 patients who had just visited general practitioners at primary-care facilities. Patients rated five features of person-focused primary care – accessibility/availability, continuity, comprehensiveness, patient involvement and doctor–patient communication. One tenth of the patients ranked the importance of each feature on a scale of one to four, and nine tenths of patients scored their experiences of care received. We calculated the potential for improvement by multiplying the proportion of negative patient experiences with the mean importance score in each country. Scores were divided into low, medium and high improvement potential. Pair-wise correlations were made between improvement scores and three dimensions of the structure of primary care – governance, economic conditions and workforce development. Findings In 26 countries, one or more features of primary care had medium or high improvement potentials. Comprehensiveness of care had medium to high improvement potential in 23 of 34 countries. In all countries, doctor–patient communication had low improvement potential. An overall stronger structure of primary care was correlated with a lower potential for improvement of continuity and comprehensiveness of care. In countries with stronger primary care governance patients perceived less potential to improve the continuity of care. Countries with better economic conditions for primary care had less potential for improvement of all features of person-focused care. Conclusion In countries with a stronger primary care structure, patients perceived that primary care had less potential for improvement.

Two decades of change in European general practice service profiles: conditions associated with the developments in 28 countries between 1993 and 2012

Abstract Objective: Evidence regarding the benefits of strong primary care has influenced health policy and practice. This study focuses on changes in the breadth of services provided by general practitioners (GPs) in Europe between 1993 and 2012 and offers possible explanations for these changes. Design: Data on the breadth of service profiles were used from two cross-sectional surveys in 28 countries: the 1993 European GP Task Profile study (6321 GPs) and the 2012 QUALICOPC study (6044 GPs). GPs’ involvement in four areas of clinical activity (first contact care, treatment of diseases, medical procedures, and prevention) was established using ecometric analyses. The changes were measured by the relative increase in the breadth of service profiles. Associations between changes and national-level conditions were examined though regression analyses. Data on the national conditions were used from various other public databases including the World Databank and the PHAMEU (Primary Health care Activity Monitor) database. Setting: A total of 28 European countries. Subjects: GPs. Main outcome measure: Changes in the breadth of GP service profiles. Results: A general trend of increased involvement of European GPs in treatment of diseases and decreased involvement in preventive activities was observed. Conditions at the national level were associated with changes in the involvement of GPs in first contact care, treatment of diseases and, to a limited extent, prevention. Especially in countries with stronger growth of health care expenditures between 1993 and 2012 the service profiles have expanded. In countries where family values are more dominant the breadth in service profiles decreased. A stronger professional status of GPs was positively associated with the change in first contact care. Conclusions: GPs in former communist countries and Turkey have increased their involvement in the provision of services. Developments in Western Europe were less evident. The developments in the service profiles could only to a very limited extent be explained by national conditions. A main driver of reform seems to be the changes in health care expenditure, which may indicate a notion of urgency because there may be a pressure to curb the rising expenditures. Key points Broad GP service profiles are an indicator of strong primary care in a country. It is expected that developments in the breadth of GP service profiles are influenced by various national conditions related to the urgency to reform, politics, and means. Between 1993 and 2012 the involvement of GPs in European countries in treatment of diseases increased and their involvement preventive activities decreased. The national conditions were found to be associated with changes in GPs’ involvement as first contact of care, treatment of diseases, and, to a limited extent, prevention. More specifically, in countries with a stronger growth in health care expenditures, service profiles of European GPs have expanded more in the past decades.

General Practitioners’ Participation in a Large, Multicountry Combined General Practitioner-Patient Survey: Recruitment Procedures and Participation Rate

Background. The participation of general practitioners (GPs) is essential in research on the performance of primary care. This paper describes the implementation of a large, multicountry study in primary care that combines a survey among GPs and a linked survey among patients that visited their practice (the QUALICOPC study). The aim is to describe the recruitment procedure and explore differences between countries in the participation rate of the GPs. Methods. Descriptive analyses were used to document recruitment procedures and to assess hypotheses potentially explaining variation in participation rates between countries. Results. The survey was implemented in 31 European countries. GPs were mainly selected through random sampling. The actual implementation of the study differed between countries. The median participation rate was 30%. Both material (such as the payment system of GPs in a country) and immaterial influences (such as estimated survey pressure) are related to differences between countries. Conclusion. This study shows that the participation of GPs may indeed be influenced by the context of the country. The implementation of complex data collection is difficult to realize in a completely uniform way. Procedures have to be tuned to the context of the country.

European priorities for research on health care organizations and service delivery.

Objectives: To provide an overview of the principal areas of research on health care organization and service delivery and to identify priority areas from a European comparative perspective. Given the large quantity of articles produced on health care organizations, we focus on primary care and hospital care. Method: A combination of methods was used for describing past and current research: (i) bibliometric analyses of published research in Pubmed and Embase 2000-09; (ii) a further classification of research based on a sample of 1,010 articles; and (iii) an identification of relevant EU-funded projects over the period 2000-10. An online survey of experts was carried out to identify priorities. The results were refined through conference discussions. Results: Research into health care organizations varies considerably across Europe. This is only partly associated with differences in countries’ gross domestic product or population. Studies were categorized into four main domains: intra-organizational control; inter-organizational relations; patient relations; and governance and accountability. Past and current research may not reflect future priorities as the domain of ‘inter-organizational relations’ is regarded by most experts as the top priority for the future, while the smallest share in the sample of published research and EU-funded projects fell into that category. Expert views show considerable homogeneity, regardless of their role in the health care system or their country. Specific future priorities include the integration of care across organizational boundaries (including the relationship between primary and secondary care), patient involvement and participation and workforce skill-mix. Conclusions: The research priorities identified in this study relate to important shared challenges in Europes health care systems. This makes cross-border learning important, especially given the clear geographical variation in health services research (HSR) funding and capacity in Europe.

Primary care practice composition in 34 countries

Health care needs in the population change through ageing and increasing multimorbidity. Primary health care might accommodate to this through the composition of practices in terms of the professionals working in them. The aim of this article is to describe the composition of primary care practices in 34 countries and to analyse its relationship to practice circumstances and the organization of the primary care system. The data were collected through a survey among samples of general practitioners (n=7183) in 34 countries. In some countries, primary care is mainly provided in single-handed practices. Other countries which have larger practices with multiple professional groups. There is no overall relationship between the professional groups in the practice and practice location. Practices that are located further from other primary care practices have more different professions. Practices with a more than average share of socially disadvantaged people and/or ethnic minorities have more different professions. In countries with a stronger pro-primary care workforce development and more comprehensive primary care delivery the number of different professions is higher. In conclusion, primary care practice composition varies strongly. The organizational scale of primary care is largely country dependent, but this is only partly explained by system characteristics.

Stressed and overworked? A cross-sectional study of the working situation of urban and rural general practitioners in Austria in the framework of the QUALICOPC project.

Aim To assess the workload of general practitioners (GPs) in Austria, with a focus on identifying the differences between GPs working in urban and rural areas. Methods Within the framework of the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe (QUALICOPC) study, data were collected from a stratified sample of GPs using a standardized questionnaire between November 2011 and May 2012. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and regression analysis. Results The analysis included data from 173 GPs. GPs in rural areas reported an average of 49.3 working hours per week, plus 23.7 on-call duties per 3 months and 26.2 out-of-office care services per week. Compared to GPs working in urban areas, even in the fully adjusted regression model, rural GPs had significantly more working hours (B 7.00; P = 0.002) and on-call duties (B 18.91; P < 0.001). 65.8% of all GPs perceived their level of stress as high and 84.6% felt they were required to do unnecessary administrative work. Conclusion Our findings show a high workload among Austrian GPs, particularly those working in rural areas. Since physicians show a diminishing interest to work as GPs, there is an imperative to improve this situation.

Health services research in Europe: what about an open marriage?

To start with the question in Diana Delnoij’s viewpoint title: we want to stay married, we do not file for divorce, but we go for an open marriage. Delnoij raises an important issue, and her views are very close to ours. It also gives us the opportunity to describe the context of her question, by providing the readership of the European Journal of Public Health with some of the main results of our project HSREPP (Health Services Research into European Policy and Practice), and to disclose our plans for the future. In contrast to public health and health protection, health systems and services are not directly part of the policy domain of the European Union (EU). They enter it as a result of policies in other areas, such as harmonization of education, mobility of labour and services, and competition, and as a result of rulings of European Court of Justice. The 7th Framework Programme of the EU for the first time defined health systems and services as a research area under its Pillar 3, ‘Optimising the delivery of health care to citizens’, aimed to provide the necessary evidence basis for informed policy decisions on health systems. In light of this increased attention, DG Research placed a call to organize a conference dedicated to health services research (HSR) and to receive inputs for priority setting of research in the area of health systems and services. A consortium consisting of main players in this field made a proposal for such a supportive action. The first aim of this project, HSREPP, was to elicit priorities for HSR in the following areas: health systems, health-care organizations and service delivery, HTA and benchmarking. …

Informing primary care reform in Greece: patient expectations and experiences (the QUALICOPC study)

BackgroundPrimary health care is the cornerstone of a high quality health care system. Greece has been actively attempting to reform health care services in order to improve heath outcomes and reduce health care spending. Patient-centered approaches to health care delivery have been increasingly acknowledged for their value informing quality improvement activities. This paper reports the quality of primary health care services in Greece as perceived by patients and aspects of health care delivery that are valued by patients.MethodsThis study was conducted as part of the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe (QUALICOPC) study. A cross-sectional sample of patients were recruited from general practitioner’s offices in Greece and surveyed. Patients rated five features of person-focused primary care: accessibility; continuity and coordination; comprehensiveness; patient activation; and doctor–patient communication. One tenth of the patients ranked the importance of each feature on a scale of one to four, and nine tenths of patients scored their experiences of care received. Comparisons were made between patients with and without chronic disease.ResultsThe sample included 220 general practitioners from both public and private sector. A total of 1964 patients that completed the experience questionnaire and 219 patients that completed the patient values questionnaire were analyzed. Patients overall report a positive experiences with the general practice they visited. Several gaps were identified in particular in terms of wait times for appointments, general practitioner access to patient medical history, delivery of preventative services, patient involvement in decision-making. Patients with chronic disease report better experience than respondents without a chronic condition, however these patient groups report the same values in terms of qualities of the primary care system that are important to them.ConclusionsData gathered may be used to improve the quality of primary health care services in Greece through an increased focus on patient-centered approaches. Our study has identified several gaps as well as factors within the primary care health system that patient’s perceive as most important which can be used to prioritize quality improvement activities, especially within the austerity period. Study findings may also have application to other countries with similar context and infrastructure.

Quality of primary health care in Poland from the perspective of the physicians providing it

BackgroundPrimary care (PC) allows patients to address most of their health needs and is essential for high quality healthcare systems. The aim of the study was to analyze the insight of nine core dimensions of Polish PC system: “Economic conditions”, “Workforce”, “Accessibility”, “Comprehensiveness”, “Continuity”, “Coordination”, “Quality of care”, “Efficiency” and “Equity” and to identify the characteristics of the providing physicians that influence their perception of the quality of care.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted as part of an international QUALICOPC project. In Poland a nationally representative sample of 220 PC physicians was selected from the database of Polish National Health Fund by a stratified random sampling procedure. The research tool was a standardized 64-item questionnaire. Each of the respondents’ answers were assigned a numerical value ranging from−1 (extremely negative) to +1 (extremely positive). The quality indicators were calculated as an arithmetic mean of variables representing particular PC dimensions.ResultsThe mean scores for the majority of the dimensions had negative values. Accessibility of care was perceived as the best dimension, while the economic conditions were evaluated most negatively. Only a small part of variation in quality evaluation could be explained by physicians’ characteristics.ConclusionsThe negative evaluation of primary care reflects the growing crisis in the health care system in Poland. There is an urgent need to apply complex recovery measures to improve the quality of primary care.

The benefits of co-location in primary care practices: the perspectives of general practitioners and patients in 34 countries

BackgroundThere is no clear evidence as to whether the co-location of primary care professionals in the same facility positively influences their way of working and the quality of healthcare as perceived by patients. The aim of this study was to identify the relationships between general practitioner (GP) co-location with other GPs and/or other professionals and the GP outcomes and patients’ experiences.MethodsWe wanted to test whether GP co-location is related to a broader range of services provided, the use of clinical governance tools and inter-professional collaboration, and whether the patients of co-located GPs perceive a better quality of care in terms of accessibility, comprehensiveness and continuity of care with their GPs. The source of data was the QUALICOPC study (Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe), which involved surveys of GPs and their patients in 34 countries, mostly in Europe. In order to study the relationships between GP co-location and both GPs’ outcomes and patients’ experience, multilevel linear regression analysis was carried out.ResultsThe GP questionnaire was filled in by 7183 GPs and the patient experience questionnaire by 61,931 patients. Being co-located with at least one other professional is the most common situation of the GPs involved in the study. Compared with single-handed GP practices, GP co-location are positively associated with the GP outcomes. Considering the patients’ perspective, comprehensiveness of care has the strongest negative relationship of GP co-location of all the dimensions of patient experiences analysed.ConclusionsThe paper highlights that GP mono- and multi-disciplinary co-location is related to positive outcomes at a GP level, such as a broader provision of technical procedures, increased collaboration among different providers and wider coordination with secondary care. However, GP co-location, particularly in a multidisciplinary setting, is related to less positive patient experiences, especially in countries with health systems characterised by a weak primary care structure.