Do the experiences of patients of state-employed family physicians and concessionaires in Slovenia differ?
Abstract
Background: Family practice in Slovenia is provided by state-employed family physicians as well as concessionaires. However, both work under a contract withthe National Health Insurance Institute. This study focuses on comparing patients’ experiences with Slovenian concessionaires and state- employed physicians.
Methods: We performed analyses using survey data from a cross-sectional study on patient experiences, which took place from September 2011 to April 2012 as a part of the international QUALICOPC study. The Slovenian branch of this study included 1,962 patients visiting family practices. Patients were classified into two groups regarding the registered status of their family physician. They completed the questionnaires immediately after visiting their family physicians. Data used in the analyses included 76variables:18socio-economic and 58variableslinked to the patient's experience.
Results:The analyses showed few differences between concessionaires and state-employed family physicians. In comparison to patients of state-employed family physicians, patients of concessionaires were less likely to make an appointment for a visit (19.8% vs. 29.2%), were generally more frequent visitors (43.7% vs. 50.7%), and more often felt that opening hours are too restricted (25.7 % vs. 31.9%). Patients of concessionaires believed more often that in general, doctors can be trusted (40.1% vs.47.1 %). A smaller percentage of patients of concessionaires felt that their physician had the capacity to deal with personal problems as well as provide medical care (61.9% vs. 54.7%).
Conclusions: There are few differences in patients’ experiences of state-employed family physicians and concessionaires. Slovenian patients have a generally positive experience with family practice services regardless of the family physicians’ status. Plans for organizational change of the health sector should include patients’ perceptions of services.
Downloads
References
Boerma WGW. Profiles of general practice in Europe: an international study of variation in the tasks of general practitioners. Utrecht: NIVEL; 2003.
Hawkins M. A White Paper Examining the Effects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on Physician Practices in the United States. The Physicians Foundation. http://www.physiciansfoundation.org/uploads/default/Health_Reform_and_the_Decline_of_Physician_Private_Practice.pdf
Feron JM, Cerexhe F, Pestiaux D, Roland M, Giet D, Montrieux C, Paulus D. GPs working in solo practice: obstacles and motivations for working in a group? A qualitative study. Family Practice. 2003; 20(2): 167–172.
Bourgueil Y, Marek A, Mousquès J. Medical group practice in primary care in six European countries, and the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec: what are the lessons for France? QES. 2007; 127: 1–8.
Oleszczyk M, Švab I, Seifert B, Królewiecka AK, Windak A. Family medicine in post-communist Europe needs a boost. Exploring the position of family medicine in healthcare systems of central and eastern Europe and Russia. BMC Family Practice. 2012; 13: 15. DOI:10.1186/1471-2296-13-15.
Hofmarcher, MM, Oxley H, Rusticelli E. Improved health system performance through better care coordination. OECD Health Working Papers, No. 30. Paris, OECD; 2007.
Saltman RB, Rico A, Boerma W, editors. Primary care in the driver’s seat? Organizational reform in European primary care. European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies Series. New York: Open University Press; 2006.
Tulchinsky TH, Varavikova E. The new public health: an introduction for the 21st century. London: Elsevier Academic Press; 2008. p. 520.
Kutzin J, Cashing C, Jakab M. Implementing Health Financing Reform. Lessons from countries in transition. European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies 2010. United Kingdom. http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/120164/E94240.pdf
Albreht T, Klazinga N. Privatisation of health care in Slovenia in the period 1992–2008. Health Policy. 2009; 90(2–3): 262–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2008.10.007. Epub 2008 Nov. 28.
Figueras J, McKee M, Cain J, Lessof S. Health systems in transition: learning from experience. European observatory on health systems and policies. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2004.
Liseckiene I, Boerma WGW, Milasauskiene Z, Valius L, Miseviciene I, Groenewegen PP. Primary care in a post-communist country 10 years later. Comparison of service profiles of Lithuanian primary care physicians in 1994 and GPs in 2004. Health Policy. 2007; 83: 105–113.
Švab I, Vatovec Progar I, Vegnuti M. Private practice in Slovenia after the health care reform. Eur J Public Health. 2001; 11(4): 407–412. DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/11.4.407.
Ivanjko Š. Pravni modeli za koncesijsko gradnjo avtocest. Ljubljana: Gospodarski vestnik; 1992.
Užmah A. Podeljevanje koncesij v zdravstvu. Privatizacija primarne ravni zdravstvene dejavnosti. Bachelor’s thesis. University of Maribor, Faculty of Economics; 2007.
Zdravniška zbornica Slovenije. Predstavitev. Accessed 14 Jul. 2014 http://www.zdravniskazbornica.si/zs/319/zbornica
Poslovno poročilo ZZZS za leto 2011/2011 Business Report of the Health Insurance Institute of Slovenia; 2012. p. 143.
Šoltes I. Revizijsko poročilo. Podeljevanje koncesij v zdravstvu – Ministrstvo za zdravje. Računsko sodišče Republike Slovenije, no. 1213-3/2007-18 Ljubljana, 22 December 2008. Accessed 16 Dec. 2013 at http://www.rs-rs.si/rsrs/rsrs.nsf/I/K9E9E5DFC762DA407C125752800207A76/$file/KoncesijevZdravstvu-MZ.pdf
Brečko U. Koncesije javnih služb. Diplomsko delo. Univerza v Ljubljani. Fakulteta za družbene vede. Ljubljana, 2004. Accessed 29. Jan. 2014 at http://dk.fdv.uni-lj.si/dela/Brecko-Urban.PDF
Schäfer WLA, Boerma WGW, Kringos DS, De Maeseneer J, Greß S, Heinemann S, Rotar-Pavlič D, Seghieri C, Švab I, Van den Berg MJ, Vainieri M, Westert GP, Willems S, Groenewegen PP. QUALICOPC is a multi-country study evaluating quality, costs and equity in primary care. BMC Fam Pract. 2011; 12: 115. DOI:10.1186/1471-2296-12-115.
Schäfer WLA, Boerma WGW, Kringos DS, De Ryck E, Greß S, Heinemann S, et al. Measures of quality, costs and equity in primary health care: instruments developed to analyse and compare primary health care in 35 countries. Qual Prim Care. 2013; 21(2): 67–79.
Klemenc-Ketis Z, Kuhar P, Kersnik J, Burazeri G, Czabanowska K. Self-assessment questionnaire for family doctors’ assessment of quality improvement competencies: a cross-cultural adaptation in Slovenia. Zdrav Var. 2014;53:DOI 10.2478/sjph-2014-0005
Chlabicz S, Marcinowicz L. Public or non-public family medicine patients’ perspective of the quality of primary care in Bialystok, Poland. Eur J Gen Pract. 2005; 11(1): 5–10.
Letna poročila o delu zastopnika pacientovih pravic za leto 2012. Accessed 7 Jan. 2014 at http://www.mz.gov.si/si/mz_za_vas/pacientove_pravice/porocila_o_stanju_na_podrocju_varstva_pacientovih_pravic/
Buetow S, Adair V, Coster G, Hight M, Gribben B, Mitchell E. Qualitative insights into practice time management: does “patient-centered time” in practice management offer a portal to improved access? Br J Gen Pract. 2002 December; 52(485): 981–7.
Wong ST, Watson DE, Young E, Regan S. What do people think is important about primary healthcare? Healthcare Policy. 2008; 3: 89–104.
Majeed A. General practice in the United Kingdom: meeting the challenges of the early 21st century. J R Soc Med 2013, 106(10): 384–5. DOI: 10.1177/0141076813504326.
Evropski indeks uporabnikov zdravstvenega varstva za leto 2013. Accessed 26 Jan. 2014 at http://www.healthpowerhouse.com/files/ehci-2013/ehci-2013-sl.pdf
Klančar D, Švab I, Kersnik J. The vision of health centers in Slovenia. Zdrav Var. 2010; 49: 37–43.
Thom DH, Hall MA, Pawlson LG. Measuring patients’ trust in physicians when assessing quality of care. Health Aff 2004; 23(4): 124–132. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.23.4.124.
Hudon C, Fortin M, Haggerty JL, Lambert M, Poitras M-E. Measuring patient perceptions of patient-centered care: a systematic review of tools for family medicine. Ann Fam Med. 2011; 9(2): 155–64.
The Author transfers to the Publisher (Zdravniški vestnik/Slovenian Medical Journal) all economic copyrights following form Article 22 of the Slovene Copyright and Related Rights Act (ZASP), including the right of reproduction, the right of distribution, the rental right, the right of public performance, the right of public transmission, the right of public communication by means of phonograms and videograms, the right of public presentation, the right of broadcasting, the right of rebroadcasting, the right of secondary broadcasting, the right of communication to the public, the right of transformation, the right of audiovisual adaptation and all other rights of the author according to ZASP.
The aforementioned rights are transferred non-exclusively, for an unlimited number of editions, for the term of the statutory
The Author can make use of his work himself or transfer subjective rights to others only after 3 months from date of first publishing in the journal Zdravniški vestnik/Slovenian Medical Journal.
The Publisher (Zdravniški vestnik/Slovenian Medical Journal) has the right to transfer the rights, acquired parties without explicit consent of the Author.
The Author consents that the Article be published under the Creative Commons BY-NC 4.0 (attribution-non-commercial) or comparable licence.
