Strengthening primary care in weak primary care systems
description
Transcript of Strengthening primary care in weak primary care systems
Strengthening primary care in weak primary care systems
Prof. Peter P. GroenewegenNIVEL – Netherlands Institute for Health
Services research
Overview
• Strong primary care is …..• The need to strengthen primary care• How weak primary care systems
strengthen primary care- Western Europe- Eastern Europe
• Social Health Insurance systems, but different conditions
Characteristics of strong primary care
• A generalist approach• The point of first contact with health care• Context-oriented• Continuity • Comprehensiveness• Co-ordination Simple single indicator: gatekeeping GPs
Why we need to strengthen primary care …
Demand side challenges• Multiple health and social
problems• Increasing and changing
health care needs• Better educated, more
demanding patients• People live longer, stay
longer at home
Supply side challenges• Organization: teams,
networks, single practices• Manpower: limited work
force, more part-time work
• Incentives: regulation, payment
• Shifts from hospital to primary care
Multiple health and social problems
Effects of strong primary care
• Better health outcomes• Good quality care• Lower costs• Better opportunities for cost containment• Better opportunities for monitoring health,
health care utilisation, quality, and preparedness
Western Europe
Western European countries with stronger and weaker
primary care
Stronger:• UK• Denmark• Spain• Netherlands• Italy• Finland
Weaker:• Portugal• Belgium• Greece• Germany• Switzerland• France
Weak primary care systems in Western Europe
• (mainly) Bismarckian systems: Belgium, France, Germany
• Small scale primary care, GP practices• Strong emphasis on freedom of choice• Demand channeling via co-payments
Organisation of primary care:Transformation from cottage
industry to modern community health service
Policy changes to strengthen primary care
Weak incentives and voluntary basis
• Germany: GP model (‘Hausarztmodelle’)
• France: preferred doctor scheme (‘médecin traitant’)
• Belgium: capitation (‘forfaitaire betaling’) and medical file (‘globaal medisch dossier’)
Germany: GP model (‘Hausarztmodelle’)
• Based on individual contracts between insurers and GPs
• Patient list; referral system; patients may switch once a year
• Appr. one fifth of publicly insured (2007)• Incentive for patients: lower copayment• Incentive for GPs: additional
reimbursement, registration fee• Effects seem to be very small
France: preferred doctor scheme (‘médecin traitant’)
• Patient list and personal medical record• Referral system• Covering appr. 80% of the French (2007)• Patient incentives: higher reimbursement• Doctor incentives: capitation for follow up
of certain chronic diseases; income loss compensation for some specialties
• Little information about effects
Belgium: medical file (‘globaal medisch dossier’)
• If patients choose to be with one GP (or practice), their GP can keep their medical file
• Incentive for patients: lower level of cost-sharing when they visit the GP who keeps their medical file
• Incentive for GPs: fixed amount per year
Belgium: capitation (‘forfaitaire betaling’)
• Capitation fee for listed patients• Mainly with group practices and health
centres in more deprived areas• 80 practices and 165.000 insured (2007)• Incentive for patients: no cost-sharing• Incentive for GPs: capitation• Lower prescriptions, referrals and
hospitalisations, more prevention
Former communist countries
Point of departure: the health care system under communism
• State funded, parallel systems• Salaried employees, large policlinics,
specialist orientation, underdeveloped primary care system
• No patient choice of provider• Strong role of government, central
planning, command-and-control
Trends in health system change in transitional countries:
• From state funding to Social Health Insurance: back to Bismarck
• From state provision to privatisation (especially primary care)
• From allocated care to more patient choice• From centralised role of government to
shared power
Gatekeeping in former communist countries
• Primary care as starting point for reforms• Introduction of gatekeeping• Training of GPs • Retraining of district doctors,
paediatricians, gynaecologists
Former communist countries with stronger and weaker primary care
Former Soviet Union – non EU• Belarus – non gatekeeping• Georgia - non gatekeeping• Kazakstan - non gatekeeping• Moldavia - non gatekeeping• Ukraine - non gatekeeping
Current EU member states• Bulgaria – gatekeeping• Czech Rep. – direct access if costs paid
privately• Estonia - gatekeeping• Hungary - gatekeeping• Latvia - gatekeeping• Lithuania - gatekeeping• Poland – direct access if costs paid
privately• Romania - gatekeeping• Slovakia – direct access if costs paid
privately
Training and retraining GPs in Lithuania: activity (numbers, scale score)1994 district therapists
1994 district paedia-tricians
2004 retrained district therapists
2004 retrained paedia-tricians
2004 newly trained GPs
Contacts (office + home visits)
19,4 20,8 28,4 30,1 23,4
Medical technical procedures
1,10 1,04 1,51 1,35 1,36
Manage-ment and follow up of disease
2,40 1,55 2,71 2,41 2,41
Training and retraining GPs in Lithuania: prevention (%)1994 district therapists
1994 district paedia-tricians
2004 retrained district therapists
2004 retrained paedia-tricians
2004 newly trained GPs
High blood pressure
90,6% 24,1% 88,6% 83,7% 76,0%
Blood cholesterol
39,4 8,6 42,0 40,8 22,7
Smoking 6,6 9,7 9,1 8,2 1,3
Alcohol 7,2 11,3 7,4 10,2 1,3
Some comparative elements
• Urgency of reform in transitional countries• Past experience of low patient choice
versus strong ideology of patient choice• (Ambulatory) medical specialist opposition
in Western European SHI systems
Upcoming policies and problems
Bismarckian systems• Disease management• Vertical systems• Performance payment--------------------------------Weak incentivesPD list system GP model individual
Transitional countries• Patient choice• Prevention
--------------------------Strong incentivesprofiling P4Pcontracts benchmarks
Unintended consequences of P4P?
Discussion
• Strengthening primary care: Important differences in context and national strategies
• Weak incentives and voluntary basis: Is it enough?• How to convince governments, doctors, insurance
organisations, patients of the urgency?• How to balance paternalism and patient choice?• EU-countries provide a laboratory for comparative
research