Literature DB >> 24852659

Assessing the responsiveness of chronic disease care - is the World Health Organization's concept of health system responsiveness applicable?

Julia Röttger1, Miriam Blümel2, Sabine Fuchs2, Reinhard Busse2.   

Abstract

The concept of health system responsiveness is an important dimension of health system performance assessment. Further efforts have been made in recent years to improve the analysis of responsiveness measurements, yet few studies have applied the responsiveness concept to the evaluation of specific health care delivery structures. The objective of this study was to test the World Health Organization's (WHO's) responsiveness concept for an application in the evaluation of chronic disease care. In September and October 2012 we conducted four focus groups of chronically ill people (n = 38) in Germany, in which participants discussed their experiences and expectations regarding health care. The data was analyzed deductively (on the basis of the WHO responsiveness concept) and inductively using directed content analysis. Ten themes related to health system responsiveness and one theme (finances) not directly related to health system responsiveness, but of high importance to the focus group participants, could be identified. Eight of the ten responsiveness themes are consistent with the WHO concept. Additionally, two new themes were identified: trust (consultation and treatment are not led by any motive other than the patients' wellbeing) and coordination (treatment involving different providers is coordinated and different actors communicate with each other). These findings indicate the suitability of the WHO responsiveness concept for the evaluation of chronic disease care. However, some amendments, in particular an extension of the concept to include the two domains trust and coordination, are necessary for a thorough assessment of the responsiveness of chronic disease care.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chronic disease care; Client orientation; Focus groups; Germany; Health system responsiveness; Patient expectations; Patient experiences; Respect for persons

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24852659     DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.05.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  13 in total

1.  Exploring Health System Responsiveness in Ambulatory Care and Disease Management and its Relation to Other Dimensions of Health System Performance (RAC) - Study Design and Methodology.

Authors:  Julia Röttger; Miriam Blümel; Susanne Engel; Brigitte Grenz-Farenholtz; Sabine Fuchs; Roland Linder; Frank Verheyen; Reinhard Busse
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2015-05-20

2.  Reasons for (not) choosing dental treatments-A qualitative study based on patients' perspective.

Authors:  Susanne Felgner; Marie Dreger; Cornelia Henschke
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-05-25       Impact factor: 3.752

3.  Assessing the performance of mental health service facilities for meeting patient priorities and health service responsiveness.

Authors:  A Bramesfeld; C Stegbauer
Journal:  Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci       Date:  2016-05-25       Impact factor: 6.892

4.  What is health systems responsiveness? Review of existing knowledge and proposed conceptual framework.

Authors:  Tolib Mirzoev; Sumit Kane
Journal:  BMJ Glob Health       Date:  2017-10-31

5.  Measuring health system responsiveness at facility level in Ethiopia: performance, correlates and implications.

Authors:  Bereket Yakob; Busisiwe Purity Ncama
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-04-11       Impact factor: 2.655

6.  Comparison of health system responsiveness between HIV and non-HIV patients at infectious disease clinics in Yunnan, China.

Authors:  Jing Li; Virasakdi Chongsuvivatwong; Sawitri Assanangkornchai; Edward B McNeil; Le Cai
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2018-06-29       Impact factor: 2.711

7.  Integrating the Population Perspective into Health System Performance Assessment (IPHA): Study Protocol for a Cross-Sectional Study in Germany Linking Survey and Claims Data of Statutorily and Privately Insured.

Authors:  Miriam Blümel; Julia Röttger; Julia Köppen; Katharina Achstetter; Reinhard Busse
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2020-09-01

8.  Realist evaluation to improve health systems responsiveness to neglected health needs of vulnerable groups in Ghana and Vietnam: Study protocol.

Authors:  Tolib Mirzoev; Ana Manzano; Bui Thi Thu Ha; Irene Akua Agyepong; Do Thi Hanh Trang; Anthony Danso-Appiah; Le Minh Thi; Mary Eyram Ashinyo; Le Thi Vui; Leveana Gyimah; Nguyen Thai Quynh Chi; Lucy Yevoo; Doan Thi Thuy Duong; Elizabeth Awini; Joseph Paul Hicks; Anna Cronin de Chavez; Sumit Kane
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Responsiveness of health care services towards the elderly in Tanzania: does health insurance make a difference? A cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Paul Joseph Amani; Malale Tungu; Anna-Karin Hurtig; Angwara Denis Kiwara; Gasto Frumence; Miguel San Sebastián
Journal:  Int J Equity Health       Date:  2020-10-12

10.  Perspectives of Public and Private Primary Healthcare Users in Two Regions of Albania on Non-Clinical Quality of Care.

Authors:  Jonila Gabrani; Christian Schindler; Kaspar Wyss
Journal:  J Prim Care Community Health       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.