Validation of ACG Case-mix for equitable resource allocation in Swedish primary health care

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Adequate resource allocation is an important factor to ensure equity in health care. Previous reimbursement models have been based on age, gender and socioeconomic factors. An explanatory model based on individual need of primary health care (PHC) has not yet been used in Sweden to allocate resources. The aim of this study was to examine to what extent the ACG case-mix system could explain concurrent costs in Swedish PHC.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Diagnoses were obtained from electronic PHC records of inhabitants in Blekinge County (approx. 150,000) listed with public PHC (approx. 120,000) for three consecutive years, 2004-2006. The inhabitants were then classified into six different resource utilization bands (RUB) using the ACG case-mix system. The mean costs for primary health care were calculated for each RUB and year. Using linear regression models and log-cost as dependent variable the adjusted R²was calculated in the unadjusted model (gender) and in consecutive models where age, listing with specific PHC and RUB were added. In an additional model the ACG groups were added.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Gender, age and listing with specific PHC explained 14.48-14.88% of the variance in individual costs for PHC. By also adding information on level of co-morbidity, as measured by the ACG case-mix system, to specific PHC the adjusted R²increased to 60.89-63.41%.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The ACG case-mix system explains patient costs in primary care to a high degree. Age and gender are important explanatory factors, but most of the variance in concurrent patient costs was explained by the ACG case-mix system.</p

Routine care provided by specialists to children and adolescents in the United States (2002-2006).

BACKGROUND: Specialist physicians provide a large share of outpatient health care for children and adolescents in the United States, but little is known about the nature and content of these services in the ambulatory setting. Our objective was to quantify and characterize routine and co-managed pediatric healthcare as provided by specialists in community settings. METHODS: Nationally representative data were obtained from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey for the years 2002-2006. We included office based physicians (excluding family physicians, general internists and general pediatricians), and a representative sample of their patients aged 18 or less. Visits were classified into mutually exclusive categories based on the major reason for the visit, previous knowledge of the health problem, and whether the visit was the result of a referral. Primary diagnoses were classified using Expanded Diagnostic Clusters. Physician report of sharing care for the patient with another physician and frequency of reappointments were also collected. RESULTS: Overall, 41.3% out of about 174 million visits were for routine follow up and preventive care of patients already known to the specialist. Psychiatry, immunology and allergy, and dermatology accounted for 54.5% of all routine and preventive care visits. Attention deficit disorder, allergic rhinitis and disorders of the sebaceous glands accounted for about a third of these visits. Overall, 73.2% of all visits resulted in a return appointment with the same physician, in half of all cases as a result of a routine or preventive care visit. CONCLUSION: Ambulatory office-based pediatric care provided by specialists includes a large share of non referred routine and preventive care for common problems for patients already known to the physician. It is likely that many of these services could be managed in primary care settings, lessening demand for specialists and improving coordination of care.RIGHTS : This article is licensed under the BioMed Central licence at http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/license which is similar to the 'Creative Commons Attribution Licence'. In brief you may : copy, distribute, and display the work; make derivative works; or make commercial use of the work - under the following conditions: the original author must be given credit; for any reuse or distribution, it must be made clear to others what the license terms of this work are

Challenges facing community health workers in Brazil’s Family Health Strategy: A qualitative study

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/144641/1/hpm2456.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/144641/2/hpm2456_am.pd

Comparison of primary care experiences among adults in general outpatient clinics and private general practice clinics in Hong Kong

Abstract. Background. The main goal of Hong Kong's publicly-funded general outpatient clinics (GOPCs) is to provide primary medical services for the financially vulnerable. The objective of the current study was to compare the primary care experiences of GOPC users and the users of care provided by private general practitioners (GPs) in Hong Kong via a territory-wide telephone survey. Methods. One thousand adults in Hong Kong aged 18 and above were interviewed by a telephone survey. The modified Chinese translated Primary Care Assessment Tool was used to collect data on respondents' primary care experience. Results. Our results indicated that services provided by GOPC were more often used by female, older, poorer, chronically-ill and less educated population. GOPC participants were also more likely to have visited a specialist or used specialist services (69.7% vs. 52.0%; p < 0.001), although this difference in utilization of specialist services disappeared after adjusting for age (55.7% vs. 52.0%, p = 0.198). Analyses were also performed to asses the relationship between healthcare settings (GOPCs versus private GPs) and primary care quality. Private GP patients achieved higher overall PCAT scores largely due to better accessibility (Mean: 6.88 vs. 8.41, p < 0.001) and person-focused care (Mean: 8.37 vs. 11.69, p < 0.001). Conclusions. Our results showed that patients primarily receiving care from private GPs in Hong Kong reported better primary care experiences than those primarily receiving care from GOPCs. This was largely due to the greater accessibility and better interpersonal relationships offered by the private GPs. As most patients use both GOPCs and private GPs, their overall primary care experiences may not be as different as the findings of this study imply. © 2010 Wong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.link_to_subscribed_fulltex

Properties of a short questionnaire for assessing Primary Care experiences for children in a population survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCAT) is an interesting set of tools for primary care research. A very short version could inform policy makers about consumer experiences with primary care (PC) through health surveys. This work aimed to investigate the validity and reliability of a selection of items from the child short edition (CS) of the PCAT.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A 24 item questionnaire permitted the identification of a regular source of care and the assessment of the key attributes of first contact, ongoing care over time, coordination, services available and services received (comprehensiveness), and cultural competence. Structural validity, reliability, and construct validity were assessed using responses from 2,200 parents of a representative sample of the population aged 0 to 14 years in Catalonia (Spain) who participated in the 2006 Health Survey. Structural validity was analyzed using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was assessed using linear regression analysis between PC experience scores and a measure of overall user satisfaction with healthcare services.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 2,095 (95.2%) parents provided useable responses on PC. After Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), the best fitting model was a 5-factor model in which the original dimensions of first contact and ongoing care were collapsed into one. The CFA also showed a second order factor onto which all domains except services available loaded (root mean square error of approximation = 0.000; comparative fit index = 1.00). Cronbach's alpha values for one of the original scales (first-contact) was poor (alpha < 0.50), but improved using the modified factor structure (alpha > 0.70). Scores on the scales were correlated with satisfaction with healthcare services (p < 0.01), thereby providing some preliminary evidence of construct validity.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This very short questionnaire obtained from the PCAT-CE yields information about five attributes of PC and a summary score. It has shown evidence of validity and reliability for judgments about experiences with primary care overall. If space on surveys is at a premium, the instrument could be useful as a measure of PC experiences.</p

Quantifying morbidities by Adjusted Clinical Group system for a Taiwan population: A nationwide analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Adjusted Clinical Group (ACG) system has been used in measuring an individual's and a population's morbidities. Although all required inputs for running the ACG system are readily available, patients' morbidities and their associations to health care utilizations have been rarely studied in Taiwan. Therefore, the objective of this study was using the ACG system to quantify morbidities for Taiwanese population and to examine their relationship to ambulatory utilizations and costs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This secondary analysis examined claims data for ambulatory services provided to 2.71 million representative Taiwanese in 2002 and 2003. People were grouped by the ACG system according to age, gender, and all ambulatory diagnosis codes in a given year. The software collapses the full set of ACGs into six morbidity categories (Non-users, Healthy, Low-morbidity, Moderate-, High- and Very-high) termed Resource Utilization Bands (RUBs). Each ACG was assigned a relative weight (RW), which was calculated as the ratio of mean ambulatory cost for each ACG to that for the overall. The distribution of morbidities was compared between years 2002 and 2003. The consistency of the distributions of visits, costs, and RWs of each ACG were examined for a two-year period. The relationship between people's morbidities and their ambulatory utilizations and costs was assessed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Ninety-eight percent of the subjects were correctly assigned to ACGs. Except for non-users (7.9 ~ 8.3%), most subjects were assigned to ACGs of acute and minor diseases and ACGs of moderate-to-high-morbid chronic diseases. The distributions of ACG-based morbidities were highly consistent (r = 0.949, <it>p < 0.001</it>) between 2002 and 2003. The ACG-specific visits (r = 0.955, <it>p < 0.001</it>), costs (r = 0.966, <it>p < 0.001</it>) and RWs (r = 0.991, <it>p < 0.001</it>) were correlated across two years. People grouped to the high-morbid ACGs had more visits and costs than those grouped to the low-morbid ACGs. Forty-six percent of the total ambulatory costs were spent by eighteen percent of the population, who were grouped to the High- and Very-high-morbidity RUBs.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study demonstrated the feasibility, validity, and reliability of using the ACG system to measure morbidities in a Taiwan population and to explain their associations with ambulatory utilizations and costs for the whole country.</p

"They think we're OK and we know we're not". A qualitative study of asylum seekers' access, knowledge and views to health care in the UK

&lt;i&gt;Background&lt;/i&gt;: The provision of healthcare for asylum seekers is a global issue. Providing appropriate and culturally sensitive services requires us to understand the barriers facing asylum seekers and the facilitators that help them access health care. Here, we report on two linked studies exploring these issues, along with the health care needs and beliefs of asylum seekers living in the UK. &lt;i&gt;Methods&lt;/i&gt;: Two qualitative methods were employed: focus groups facilitated by members of the asylum seeking community and interviews, either one-to-one or in a group, conducted through an interpreter. Analysis was facilitated using the Framework method. &lt;i&gt;Results&lt;/i&gt;: Most asylum seekers were registered with a GP, facilitated for some by an Asylum Support nurse. Many experienced difficulty getting timely appointments with their doctor, especially for self-limiting symptoms that they felt could become more serious, especially in children. Most were positive about the health care they received, although some commented on the lack of continuity. However, there was surprise and disappointment at the length of waiting times both for hospital appointments and when attending accident and emergency departments. Most had attended a dentist, but usually only when there was a clinical need. The provision of interpreters in primary care was generally good, although there was a tension between interpreters translating verbatim and acting as patient advocates. Access to interpreters in other settings, e.g. in-patient hospital stays, was problematic. Barriers included the cost of over-the-counter medication, e.g. children's paracetamol; knowledge of out-of-hours medical care; and access to specialists in secondary care. Most respondents came from countries with no system of primary medical care, which impacted on their expectations of the UK system. &lt;i&gt;Conclusion&lt;/i&gt;: Most asylum seekers were positive about their experiences of health care. However, we have identified issues regarding their understanding of how the UK system works, in particular the role of general practitioners and referral to hospital specialists. The provision of an Asylum Support nurse was clearly a facilitator to accessing primary medical care. Initiatives to increase their awareness and understanding of the UK system would be beneficial. Interpreting services also need to be developed, in particular their role in secondary care and the development of the role of interpreter as patient advocate