Dataset Information

Comparison of patient perceptions of primary care quality across healthcare facilities in Korea: A cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT: Primary care is not well established in Korea despite its importance in population health. To reinforce the primary care system, understanding the public view of primary care will be essential. We aimed to compare the public perception of primary care qualities across types of healthcare facilities. We conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey at a university in Seoul, South Korea, from October 2018 to February 2019. Using the Korean Primary Care Assessment Tool (K-PCAT), participants assessed the qualities of primary care services provided by the university health service (a university-based, patient-centered primary care model), community clinics, and hospitals. We compared K-PCAT scores across facilities and evaluated the factors associated with the differences using general linear models. A total of 5,748 responses were analyzed. K-PCAT total scores were highest for the university health service (61.0 ± 15.9) and lowest for hospitals (48.1 ± 14.5), with significant differences between facilities (P < .001). The university health service received the highest scores for first contact, comprehensiveness, personalized care, and family/community orientation; community clinics for continuity of care; and hospitals for care coordination and trust/satisfaction. Primary care facilities were rated higher than hospitals by individuals in good health, with low income levels, using ambulatory care more frequently, and spending less on medical expenses. In conclusion, the user-perceived primary care quality was higher for community-based primary care facilities than hospitals. The highest score was for the university health service, suggesting that setting-based, patient-centered primary care would be an effective model for restructuring the primary care system in Korea.

SUBMITTER: Cho Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7064208 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of patient perceptions of primary care quality across healthcare facilities in Korea: A cross-sectional study.

Cho Yongjung Y Chung Heeyoung H Joo Hyundeok H Park Hyung Jun HJ Joh Hee-Kyung HK Kim Ji Won JW Lee Jong-Koo JK

PloS one 20200310 3

Primary care is not well established in Korea despite its importance in population health. To reinforce the primary care system, understanding the public view of primary care will be essential. We aimed to compare the public perception of primary care qualities across types of healthcare facilities. We conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey at a university in Seoul, South Korea, from October 2018 to February 2019. Using the Korean Primary Care Assessment Tool (K-PCAT), participants assess ...[more]

PMID: 32155199

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOlder adults are increasingly accessing information and communicating using patient-facing portals available through their providers' electronic health record (EHR). Most theories of technology acceptance and use suggest that patients' overall satisfaction with care should be independent of their chosen level of portal engagement. However, achieving expected benefits of portal use depends on demonstrated support from providers to meet these expectations. This is especially true among older adults, who may require more guidance. However, little is known about whether misalignment of expectations around technology-facilitated care is associated with lower perceptions of care quality.ObjectiveThe aims of this study were to analyze whether older adults' assessment of primary care quality differs across levels of patient portal engagement and whether perceptions of how well their provider uses the EHR to support care moderates this relationship.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey analysis of 158 older adults over the age of 65 (average age 71.4 years) across Michigan using a 13-measure composite of self-assessed health care quality. Portal use was categorized as none, moderate (use of 1-3 functionalities), or extensive (use of 4-7 functionalities). EHR value perception was measured by asking respondents how they felt their doctor's EHR use improved the patient-provider relationship.ResultsModerate portal users, compared to those who were extensive users, had lower estimated care quality (-0.214 on 4-point scale; P=.03). Differences between extensive portal users and nonportal users were not significant. Quality perception was only particularly low among moderate portal users with low EHR value perception; those with high EHR value perception rated quality similarly to other portal user groups.ConclusionsOlder adults who are moderate portal users are the least satisfied with their care, and the most sensitive to perceptions of how well their provider uses the EHR to support the relationship. Encouraging portal use without compromising perceptions of quality requires thinking beyond patient-focused education. Achieving value from use of patient-facing technologies with older adults is contingent upon matched organizational investments that support technology-enabled care delivery. Providers and staff need policies and practices that demonstrate technology adeptness. Older adults may need more tailored signaling and accommodation for technology to be maximally impactful.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The quality of patient-physician discussions about chronic kidney disease (CKD) in primary care has not been studied previously. STUDY DESIGN:Cross-sectional study. SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS:We audiotaped encounters between 236 patients with hypertension and their primary care physicians (n = 40). PREDICTORS:Patient, physician, and encounter characteristics. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS:We described the occurrence and characteristics (content, use of technical terms, and physician assessment of patient comprehension of new concepts) of CKD discussions. We assessed patient and physician characteristics associated with CKD discussion occurrence. RESULTS:Many patients (mean age, 59 years) had uncontrolled hypertension (51%), diabetes (44%), and/or 3 or more comorbid conditions (51%). Most primary care physicians practiced (52%) fewer than 10 years. CKD discussions occurred in few (26%; n = 61) encounters, with content focused on laboratory assessment (89%), risk-factor treatment (28%), and causes (26%) of CKD. In encounters that included a CKD discussion, physicians used technical terms (28%; n = 17) and rarely assessed patients' comprehension (2%; n = 1). CKD discussions were statistically significantly less common in visits of patients with some (vs no) college education (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09-0.56), with 3 or more (vs fewer) comorbid conditions (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.25-0.96), and who saw physicians with more (vs fewer) than 10 years of practice experience (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21-0.80). CKD discussions were more common during longer encounters (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.04-1.65) and encounters in which diabetes was (vs was not) discussed (OR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.22-6.77). LIMITATIONS:Generalizability of our findings may be limited. CONCLUSIONS:Patient-physician discussions about CKD in high-risk primary care patients were infrequent. Physicians used technical terms and infrequently assessed patients' understanding of new CKD concepts. Efforts to improve the frequency and content of patient-physician CKD discussions in primary care could improve patients' clinical outcomes.

Project description:Perceptions of asthma control often vary between patients and physicians. This cross-sectional survey provided UK-specific data on actual and perceived asthma control in patients (18-75 years) attending routine asthma reviews in primary, secondary and tertiary settings. Differences between healthcare professionals' (HCP) and patients' perceptions of asthma control were evaluated via an online questionnaire and compared to a control-the validated asthma control test (ACT)-which patients completed. Treated patients (at least a short acting ß-agonist) with a documented diagnosis of asthma were enroled and consented within a month of their last appointment. Patients were grouped according to the British Thoracic Society (BTS)/Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) 2014 treatment guidelines (BTS/SIGN steps 1-5). A total of 260 patients were screened: 234 were eligible for enrolment: 33, 52, 50, 49 and 50 patients in steps 1-5, respectively. Seventy per cent (164) were women. The percentage of patients aged 45-64 years was 47.4%. HCPs classed 70% (164) as non-smokers. 84.2% of patients and 73.9% of HCPs perceived that asthma was controlled but ACT results suggest that asthma was only controlled in 54.7% of patients (ACT score ≥20). Patients in steps 4 and 5 had the highest levels of uncontrolled asthma. Correct agreement between ACT score with perceptions of controlled or uncontrolled asthma occurred in 67.9% of patients and 68.8% of HCPs; the poorest levels of agreement occurred in patients in steps 4 and 5. Uncontrolled asthma is common in UK patients. High proportions of patients and HCPs have incorrect perceptions of asthma control, especially in relation to patients with asthma in steps 4 and 5.MISPERCEPTIONS OF CONTROL ABOUND AMONG UK PATIENTS AND DOCTORS: Asthma patients and their doctors often misperceive whether the disease is under control, according to a British study. Andrew Menzies-Gow from Royal Brompton Hospital in London and Gavin Chiu from Boehringer Ingelheim UK in Bracknell used an online questionnaire to assess perceptions of asthma control among 234 patients and their healthcare providers. All participants had at least intermittent asthma that required occasional treatment; many had more severe disease. The researchers found that 84% of patients and 74% of doctors thought the asthma was well controlled, but results of the Asthma Control Test indicated only 55% of patients objectively achieved disease control. Correct agreement between the validated test and more subjective perceptions occurred in only 68 % of patients and 69% of doctors. Addressing this mismatch could go a long way to improving asthma control among British patients.

Project description:Quality care in health facilities is critical for a sustainable health insurance system because of its influence on clients' decisions to participate in health insurance and utilize health services. Exploration of the different dimensions of healthcare quality and their associations will help determine more effective quality improvement interventions and health insurance sustainability strategies, especially in resource constrained countries in Africa where universal access to good quality care remains a challenge.To examine the differences in perceptions of clients and health staff on quality healthcare and determine if these perceptions are associated with technical quality proxies in health facilities. Implications of the findings for a sustainable National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) in Ghana are also discussed.This is a cross-sectional study in two southern regions in Ghana involving 64 primary health facilities: 1,903 households and 324 health staff. Data collection lasted from March to June, 2012. A Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test was performed to determine differences in client and health staff perceptions of quality healthcare. Spearman's rank correlation test was used to ascertain associations between perceived and technical quality care proxies in health facilities, and ordered logistic regression employed to predict the determinants of client and staff-perceived quality healthcare.Negative association was found between technical quality and client-perceived quality care (coef. = -0.0991, p<0.0001). Significant staff-client perception differences were found in all healthcare quality proxies, suggesting some level of unbalanced commitment to quality improvement and potential information asymmetry between clients and service providers. Overall, the findings suggest that increased efforts towards technical quality care alone will not necessarily translate into better client-perceived quality care and willingness to utilize health services in NHIS-accredited health facilities.There is the need to intensify client education and balanced commitment to technical and perceived quality improvement efforts. This will help enhance client confidence in Ghana's healthcare system, stimulate active participation in the national health insurance, increase healthcare utilization and ultimately improve public health outcomes.

Project description:BACKGROUND:It is increasingly apparent that access to healthcare without adequate quality of care is insufficient to improve population health outcomes. We assess whether the most commonly measured attribute of health facilities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)-the structural inputs to care-predicts the clinical quality of care provided to patients. METHODS AND FINDINGS:Service Provision Assessments are nationally representative health facility surveys conducted by the Demographic and Health Survey Program with support from the US Agency for International Development. These surveys assess health system capacity in LMICs. We drew data from assessments conducted in 8 countries between 2007 and 2015: Haiti, Kenya, Malawi, Namibia, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, and Uganda. The surveys included an audit of facility infrastructure and direct observation of family planning, antenatal care (ANC), sick-child care, and (in 2 countries) labor and delivery. To measure structural inputs, we constructed indices that measured World Health Organization-recommended amenities, equipment, and medications in each service. For clinical quality, we used data from direct observations of care to calculate providers' adherence to evidence-based care guidelines. We assessed the correlation between these metrics and used spline models to test for the presence of a minimum input threshold associated with good clinical quality. Inclusion criteria were met by 32,531 observations of care in 4,354 facilities. Facilities demonstrated moderate levels of infrastructure, ranging from 0.63 of 1 in sick-child care to 0.75 of 1 for family planning on average. Adherence to evidence-based guidelines was low, with an average of 37% adherence in sick-child care, 46% in family planning, 60% in labor and delivery, and 61% in ANC. Correlation between infrastructure and evidence-based care was low (median 0.20, range from -0.03 for family planning in Senegal to 0.40 for ANC in Tanzania). Facilities with similar infrastructure scores delivered care of widely varying quality in each service. We did not detect a minimum level of infrastructure that was reliably associated with higher quality of care delivered in any service. These findings rely on cross-sectional data, preventing assessment of relationships between structural inputs and clinical quality over time; measurement error may attenuate the estimated associations. CONCLUSION:Inputs to care are poorly correlated with provision of evidence-based care in these 4 clinical services. Healthcare workers in well-equipped facilities often provided poor care and vice versa. While it is important to have strong infrastructure, it should not be used as a measure of quality. Insight into health system quality requires measurement of processes and outcomes of care.

Dataset Information

Comparison of patient perceptions of primary care quality across healthcare facilities in Korea: A cross-sectional study.

Publications

Comparison of patient perceptions of primary care quality across healthcare facilities in Korea: A cross-sectional study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets