OBJECTIVE: To measure the relative efficiency of primary care (PC) in turning their structures into services delivery and turning their services delivery into quality outcomes. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study based on the dataset of the Primary Healthcare Activity Monitor for Europe project. Two Data Envelopment ANALYSIS: models were run to compare the relative technical efficiency. A sensitivity analysis of the resulting efficiency scores was performed. SETTING: PC systems in 22 European countries in 2009/2010. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Model 1 included data on PC governance, workforce development and economic conditions as inputs and access, coordination, continuity and comprehensiveness of care as outputs. Model 2 included the previous process dimensions as inputs and quality indicators as outputs. RESULTS: There is relatively reasonable efficiency in all countries at delivering as many as possible PC processes at a given level of PC structure. It is particularly important to invest in economic conditions to achieve an efficient structure-process balance. Only five countries have fully efficient PC systems in turning their services delivery into high quality outcomes, using a similar combination of access, continuity and comprehensiveness, although they differ on the adoption of coordination of services. There is a large variation in efficiency levels obtained by countries with inefficient PC in turning their services delivery into quality outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Maximizing the individual functions of PC without taking into account the coherence within the health-care system is not sufficient from a policymaker's point of view when aiming to achieve efficiency.
OBJECTIVE: To measure the relative efficiency of primary care (PC) in turning their structures into services delivery and turning their services delivery into quality outcomes. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study based on the dataset of the Primary Healthcare Activity Monitor for Europe project. Two Data Envelopment ANALYSIS: models were run to compare the relative technical efficiency. A sensitivity analysis of the resulting efficiency scores was performed. SETTING: PC systems in 22 European countries in 2009/2010. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Model 1 included data on PC governance, workforce development and economic conditions as inputs and access, coordination, continuity and comprehensiveness of care as outputs. Model 2 included the previous process dimensions as inputs and quality indicators as outputs. RESULTS: There is relatively reasonable efficiency in all countries at delivering as many as possible PC processes at a given level of PC structure. It is particularly important to invest in economic conditions to achieve an efficient structure-process balance. Only five countries have fully efficient PC systems in turning their services delivery into high quality outcomes, using a similar combination of access, continuity and comprehensiveness, although they differ on the adoption of coordination of services. There is a large variation in efficiency levels obtained by countries with inefficient PC in turning their services delivery into quality outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Maximizing the individual functions of PC without taking into account the coherence within the health-care system is not sufficient from a policymaker's point of view when aiming to achieve efficiency.
Keywords:
benchmarking; health policy; health-care system; measurement of quality; primary care/general practice; quality indicators; setting of care
Authors: William C W Wong; Sunfang Jiang; Jason J Ong; Minghui Peng; Eric Wan; Shanzhu Zhu; Cindy L K Lam; Michael R Kidd; Martin Roland Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: William C W Wong; ShanZhu Zhu; Jason J Ong; MingHui Peng; Cindy L K Lam; Michael R Kidd; Martin Roland; SunFang Jiang Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-07-13 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Danica R Pavlič; Maja Sever; Zalika Klemenc-Ketiš; Igor Švab; Milena Vainieri; Chiara Seghieri; Alem Maksuti Journal: Prim Health Care Res Dev Date: 2018-01-08 Impact factor: 1.458
Authors: Anna Holst; Cecilia Björkelund; Alexandra Metsini; Jens-Henrik Madsen; Dominique Hange; Eva-Lisa L Petersson; Maria Cm Eriksson; Marie Kivi; Per-Åke Å Andersson; Mikael Svensson Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-06-14 Impact factor: 2.692