OBJECTIVE: Present a methodology for evaluating cost-effectiveness in primary health care centers (PHCs) in Chile based on the family health care model promoted in Chile and evaluate the results of the first two years of operation of the first pilot center to work under this new primary-care model. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness study with a social perspective and a one-year time frame was conducted. In order to compare the university health center in question with the control (a municipal health center), a Family Health Center Composite Quality Index (FHCCQI) was devised. It combines technical indicators and user perceptions of the health centers in six areas: access, continuity of medical care, a preventive and promotional clinical approach, problem-solving capability, participation, and a biopsychosocial and family approach. In order to calculate the costs, the centers' expenses, the savings realized in the rest of the health system, and patients' out-of-pocket expenditures were considered. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICR) was estimated and a sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: The university health center was 13.4% more expensive (an additional US$8.93 per annum per enrollee) and was more effective (FHCCQI 13.3% greater) than the municipal one. Accordingly, the ICR is US$0.67 for each additional percentage point of FHCCQI increase. CONCLUSIONS: According to the PHC evaluation model that was implemented, the centers that follow the Chilean family health care model are more effective than traditional PHC centers, as measured by both technical indicators and user ratings.
OBJECTIVE: Present a methodology for evaluating cost-effectiveness in primary health care centers (PHCs) in Chile based on the family health care model promoted in Chile and evaluate the results of the first two years of operation of the first pilot center to work under this new primary-care model. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness study with a social perspective and a one-year time frame was conducted. In order to compare the university health center in question with the control (a municipal health center), a Family Health Center Composite Quality Index (FHCCQI) was devised. It combines technical indicators and user perceptions of the health centers in six areas: access, continuity of medical care, a preventive and promotional clinical approach, problem-solving capability, participation, and a biopsychosocial and family approach. In order to calculate the costs, the centers' expenses, the savings realized in the rest of the health system, and patients' out-of-pocket expenditures were considered. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICR) was estimated and a sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: The university health center was 13.4% more expensive (an additional US$8.93 per annum per enrollee) and was more effective (FHCCQI 13.3% greater) than the municipal one. Accordingly, the ICR is US$0.67 for each additional percentage point of FHCCQI increase. CONCLUSIONS: According to the PHC evaluation model that was implemented, the centers that follow the Chilean family health care model are more effective than traditional PHC centers, as measured by both technical indicators and user ratings.