Upload
melosa
View
30
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Grant Agreement no. 241595. EUprimecare : Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe. Dr. Antonio Sarría-Santamera (ISCIII) Sonia García (ISCIII) Eleonora Corsalini (UB). September 2012, Gothenburg (Sweden) European Forum Primary Care. Background. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
EUprimecare: Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe
September 2012, Gothenburg (Sweden)European Forum Primary Care
Grant Agreement no. 241595
Dr. Antonio Sarría-Santamera (ISCIII)Sonia García (ISCIII)
Eleonora Corsalini (UB)
• The goals of any healthcare system:• Deliver effective, safe, quality personal and non-personal
health interventions to those that need them, when and where needed, with minimum waste of resources
Access
Costs Quality
Background
• The Tallin Charter • Strengthening of health systems to improve people's health
but keeping equity.
• Primary Care • Basic structure of health system• Eliminating health disparities
Background
• Common framework to describe Primary Care models in the EU is not available
• Not yet developed a trans-national consensus on how to define quality of Primary Care
• Cost of Primary Care are not well identified in national accounting systems
Background
Objectives
• To contribute to improving the knowledge regarding Primary Care in Europe:
exploring the relationships that could exist between Quality and Costs of different models and systems of organizing and delivering PC across Europe
• Institute of Health Carlos III. ISCIII. Spain • Universität Bielefeld. UNIBI. Germany • University of Tartu. UTartu. Estonia • National Institute for Strategic Health Research. ESKI. Hungary • Országos Alapellátási Intezet. OALI. Hungary • Institute for health and Welfare. THL. Finland • Kaunas University of Medicine. KMU. Lithuania• Universitá Commerciale Luigi Bocconi. UB. Italy
Partners
Conceptual structure
Identify a methodology to measure the PC quality
WP 5 & 6
Identify a methodology to measure costs in PC
WP 3 & 4
WP 7
WP2
Evaluation of PC models
CO
OR
DIN
AT
ION
W
P 1
DIS
SM
INA
TIO
N
W
P 8
To measure the health quality in PC
To measure costs in PC
ORGANIZATION OF PRIMARY CARE IN
EUROPE
REGULATION
FINANCING
PAYMENTORGANIZATION
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
• Costs
• Quality:
Approach
Work package 2: Evaluation of PC models in
EuropeMethodological Approach of a Classification System of PC Models in Europe : Germany, Spain, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Italia and Lithuania.
WP2: Methodology
1. Literature review• Structure or process of PC in Europe• Control knobs: financing, regulation, payment, organization, and
organizational behavior
2. Selection of indicators => template design:1. 5 variables (Control knobs) to optimize healthcare systems results:
2. Range of services
3. Descriptive Analysis & Principal Component Analysis
FINANCING Mixed model
(Hungary)
BISMARCK SS(Estonia, Germany,
Lithuania)
BEVERIDGE NHS(Finland, Italy,
Spain)
7% Uninsured
10,6% Private Insurance18,8% Double coverage
Expenditure in HCas GDP
10,5%
6,1% 6,6%
24%
Expenditure in PC
5,7%
16% Double coverage
Descriptive analysis (I)
• Formal mechanisms to guarantee accessibility, equity and quality of healthcare
• Gate-keeping systems, except in Germany
• Facilities:• Mostly public: Finland, Spain, Hungary and Lithuania• Totally private: Germany, Estonia and Italy
• Clinical practice: • Integrated network: Finland and Spain• Solo and group practices: Germany, Estonia, Italy, Lithuania, Hungary
REGULATION
ORGANIZATION
Descriptive analysis (II)
• Process to monitoring and improving the quality of medical practice: • Quality management systems measuring clinical and no clinical
quality indicators• Clinical practices guidelines• Continuing education
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Descriptive analysis (III)
Provision of services through national/regional/local health systems (Yes/No)
Private voluntary health insurance (Yes/No)
Geographical distribution of PC services (Yes/No)
Professional income (Capitation/Salary/Fee for service/Out of pocket)
Gatekeeping for specialist (Yes/No) Type of facilities (Public/private) Type of clinical practice (Solo practice/Group practice/ Network)
Improvement programs & Quality management systems (Yes/No) Continuing clinical education program (Yes/No) Local adaptation of clinical practice guideline (Yes/No)
Financing
Regulation
Organization
Payment
Organizational behavior
Quantitative analysis (PCA)
Range of services
Results of Qualitative analysis
Based on a functional perspective, allowed to proposing 5 models:
1.Direct access to specialist
2.Referral required from GP, mainly solo-practices in PC3.Referral required from GP, mainly group-practices in PC
4.Health care centers5.Polyclinics
• Based on a functional perspective, allowed to proposing 5 functional models:
• Model 1: Direct access to any GP or specialist (Germany)• Model 2: Referral required from GP, mainly solo-practices in PC
(Hungary, Italy)• Model 3: Referral required from GP, mainly group-practices in PC
(Estonia, Lithuania)• Model 4: GPs working mainly in health care centres (Finland, Spain)• Model 5: Polyclinics (Shemasko). Not necessarily GPs at all
Results
Validation models of PC in Europe (24 countries EU )
COUNTRYGEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION
OF PRIMARY CARE SERVICES
National system
Regiona/local system
Multiple Insurers
Complementary & suplementary
Duplicative
ESTONIAFINLANDGERMANYHUNGARYITALY LITHUANIASPAINBELGIUMFRANCELUXEMBURGNETHERLANDSUNITED KINGDOMIRELANDPORTUGALDENMARKGREECENORWAYSWEDENSWITZERLANDAUSTRIACZECH REPUBLICICELANDPOLANDSLOVAK REPUBLIC
PROVISION SERVICES VOLUNTARY PRIVATE INSURANCE
Capitation SalaryFee for service
Out of pocket
ESTONIAFINALNDGERMANYHUNGARYITALY LITHUANIASPAINBELGIUMFRANCELUXEMBURGNETHERLANDSUNITED KINGDOMIRELANDPORTUGALDENMARKGREECENORWAYSWEDENSWITZERLANDAUSTRIACZECH REPUBLICICELANDPOLANDSLOVAK REPUBLIC
COUNTRYPROFESSIONAL INCOME *
*Predominance
COUNTRYGATEKEEPING TO
SPECIALISTS TYPE OF
FACILITIES*
Public Solo practice Group practiceIntegrated
networkESTONIAFINALNDGERMANYHUNGARYITALY LITHUANIASPAINBELGIUMFRANCELUXEMBURGNETHERLANDSUNITED KINGDOMIRELANDPORTUGALDENMARKGREECENORWAYSWEDENSWITZERLANDAUSTRIACZECH REPUBLICICELANDPOLANDSLOVAK REPUBLIC
TYPE OF PRACTICE*
* Predominance
COUNTRY
FORMAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT & IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMMES
CONTINUING CLINICAL EDUCATION
PROGRAMMES
LOCAL ADAPTATION OF
CLINICAL GUIDELINES
ESTONIAFINALNDGERMANYHUNGARYITALY LITHUANIASPAINBELGIUMFRANCELUXEMBURGNETHERLANDSUNITED KINGDOMIRELANDPORTUGALDENMARKGREECENORWAYSWEDENSWITZERLANDAUSTRIACZECH REPUBLICICELANDPOLANDSLOVAK REPUBLIC
Framework for classification of health systems based on PCMultidimensional => more complex => more realistic
Healthcare services provision Basic coverageGate-keeping
Private insurances Professional payment
Type of facilities Type of practice
Conclusions
Work package 3&4: Costs of Primary Care Systems
4 clinical vignettes representing the main areas of activity of PC: Acute care Chronic care Health promotion Prevention (vaccination)
Methodology Micro-costing
Methodology Macro-costing
• Actual costs: Real not estimated• Usual accounting principles and practices• Indicated in the estimated overall budget
Incl
udes Personnel Costs
Durable EquipmentConsumables and supplies identifiable
Work package 5&6: Quality of Primary Care Systems
• Focus Group Discussion :• Patients (n= 53)• Primary care professionals (n= 64)• 7 countries: Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Spain.
• Helped to understand the views about quality in the different partner countries and to set a list of quality criteria.
• Non-clinical indicators for each criteria were identified from the literature review and prioritized by scoring according to importance and measurability.
Methodology Quality Indicators
60 Quality Indicators (aprox) selected to measure Quality of PC in Europe
Methodology Quality Indicators
Population Survey:
A sample of 3.020 persons25-75 years old7 countries participating in the projectDomains:
Socio-demographicSatisfactionSelf-perceived healthUtilization of servicesPrevention and health promotion interventions
Methodology Quality at the Population Level
Professional survey:
Medical records: Diabetes and blood pressure high14 indicators Specific approach for extracting data in each country
(sample)
Methodology Quality at the Clinical Level