葡萄牙专科门诊的自由选择:对医院质量反应的观察分析

IF 3.6 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health Policy Pub Date : 2024-09-17 DOI:10.1016/j.healthpol.2024.105163
Joana Vales , Joana Cima , Julian Perelman
{"title":"葡萄牙专科门诊的自由选择:对医院质量反应的观察分析","authors":"Joana Vales ,&nbsp;Joana Cima ,&nbsp;Julian Perelman","doi":"10.1016/j.healthpol.2024.105163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Portugal introduced freedom of choice for initial specialist consultations in 2016 to boost quality via competition. However, for tangible benefits, specialized care demand must be quality-elastic. This research probes the relation between choosing hospital out the residence area and their quality traits.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We used data for all primary consultation requests from primary care centres to hospitals from 1/1/2017 to 31/12/2018 (<em>n</em> = 3,346,335). We modelled the choice of a hospital as a function of its quality characteristics, adjusting for area-based socioeconomic variables using logistic regressions.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Results indicate that patients and their general practitioners consider quality indicators when choosing a hospital. Higher mortality, longer waiting times and higher readmission rates at the hospital of origin were positively associated with the patient's choice. Freedom of choice is less used when the distance to the hospital of origin increases. Similar patterns were observed for larger hospitals and those with academic status.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>This study underscores the relevance of quality considerations in hospital selection by both patients and their general practitioners (GPs). The implications are two-fold. Firstly, improving quality appears as a factor to increase attractiveness, so that hospital competition may lead to improved health outcomes. Secondly, it highlights that hospital financing should include an activity dimension in which “money follows the patient”, otherwise no financial incentive exists to improve quality. Hence, the current hospital financing model and the limited possibility to choose in certain areas limit the potential of quality improvement based on enhanced attractivity. Decision makers should be aware that quality is a driver of patient choice, as our study demonstrates, and adapt the system to take advantage of this reality.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55067,"journal":{"name":"Health Policy","volume":"149 ","pages":"Article 105163"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Freedom of choice for specialized consultation in Portugal: An observational analysis of response to hospital quality\",\"authors\":\"Joana Vales ,&nbsp;Joana Cima ,&nbsp;Julian Perelman\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.healthpol.2024.105163\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Portugal introduced freedom of choice for initial specialist consultations in 2016 to boost quality via competition. However, for tangible benefits, specialized care demand must be quality-elastic. This research probes the relation between choosing hospital out the residence area and their quality traits.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We used data for all primary consultation requests from primary care centres to hospitals from 1/1/2017 to 31/12/2018 (<em>n</em> = 3,346,335). We modelled the choice of a hospital as a function of its quality characteristics, adjusting for area-based socioeconomic variables using logistic regressions.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Results indicate that patients and their general practitioners consider quality indicators when choosing a hospital. Higher mortality, longer waiting times and higher readmission rates at the hospital of origin were positively associated with the patient's choice. Freedom of choice is less used when the distance to the hospital of origin increases. Similar patterns were observed for larger hospitals and those with academic status.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>This study underscores the relevance of quality considerations in hospital selection by both patients and their general practitioners (GPs). The implications are two-fold. Firstly, improving quality appears as a factor to increase attractiveness, so that hospital competition may lead to improved health outcomes. Secondly, it highlights that hospital financing should include an activity dimension in which “money follows the patient”, otherwise no financial incentive exists to improve quality. Hence, the current hospital financing model and the limited possibility to choose in certain areas limit the potential of quality improvement based on enhanced attractivity. Decision makers should be aware that quality is a driver of patient choice, as our study demonstrates, and adapt the system to take advantage of this reality.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55067,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Policy\",\"volume\":\"149 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105163\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851024001738\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851024001738","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景葡萄牙于 2016 年推出了专家初诊自由选择制度,以通过竞争提高质量。然而,要想获得切实利益,专科医疗需求必须具有质量弹性。本研究探讨了在居住区外选择医院与医院质量特征之间的关系。方法我们使用了2017年1月1日至2018年12月31日期间基层医疗中心向医院提出的所有初诊请求数据(n = 3,346,335)。结果结果表明,患者及其全科医生在选择医院时会考虑质量指标。原住地医院的死亡率较高、等待时间较长和再入院率较高与患者的选择呈正相关。与原住地医院的距离越远,选择自由度越小。这项研究强调了患者及其全科医生(GPs)在选择医院时对医疗质量的考虑。其意义有两方面。首先,提高质量似乎是增加医院吸引力的一个因素,因此医院竞争可能会带来更好的医疗效果。其次,研究强调医院融资应包括 "钱跟着病人走 "的活动维度,否则就不存在提高质量的经济激励。因此,目前的医院融资模式和在某些领域的有限选择限制了在增强吸引力的基础上提高质量的潜力。决策者应该意识到,正如我们的研究结果所表明的那样,质量是患者选择的驱动力,并调整制度以利用这一现实。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Freedom of choice for specialized consultation in Portugal: An observational analysis of response to hospital quality

Background

Portugal introduced freedom of choice for initial specialist consultations in 2016 to boost quality via competition. However, for tangible benefits, specialized care demand must be quality-elastic. This research probes the relation between choosing hospital out the residence area and their quality traits.

Methods

We used data for all primary consultation requests from primary care centres to hospitals from 1/1/2017 to 31/12/2018 (n = 3,346,335). We modelled the choice of a hospital as a function of its quality characteristics, adjusting for area-based socioeconomic variables using logistic regressions.

Results

Results indicate that patients and their general practitioners consider quality indicators when choosing a hospital. Higher mortality, longer waiting times and higher readmission rates at the hospital of origin were positively associated with the patient's choice. Freedom of choice is less used when the distance to the hospital of origin increases. Similar patterns were observed for larger hospitals and those with academic status.

Discussion

This study underscores the relevance of quality considerations in hospital selection by both patients and their general practitioners (GPs). The implications are two-fold. Firstly, improving quality appears as a factor to increase attractiveness, so that hospital competition may lead to improved health outcomes. Secondly, it highlights that hospital financing should include an activity dimension in which “money follows the patient”, otherwise no financial incentive exists to improve quality. Hence, the current hospital financing model and the limited possibility to choose in certain areas limit the potential of quality improvement based on enhanced attractivity. Decision makers should be aware that quality is a driver of patient choice, as our study demonstrates, and adapt the system to take advantage of this reality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Policy
Health Policy 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
6.10%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Policy is intended to be a vehicle for the exploration and discussion of health policy and health system issues and is aimed in particular at enhancing communication between health policy and system researchers, legislators, decision-makers and professionals concerned with developing, implementing, and analysing health policy, health systems and health care reforms, primarily in high-income countries outside the U.S.A.
期刊最新文献
How COVID-19 illness perceptions and individual shocks are associated with trust during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia, France, Germany, and South Africa. Implementing integrated care infrastructure: A longitudinal study on the interplay of policies, interorganizational arrangements and interoperability in NHS England. Public contributions to R&D of medical innovations: A framework for analysis. What mechanisms lead to the endurance of health and social care integration? A multiple case study in Italy. The right to health for socioeconomically disadvantaged TB patients in South Korea: An AAAQ framework analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1