The effects of gatekeeping on the quality of primary care in Guangdong Province, China: a cross-sectional study using primary care assessment tool-adult edition

被引:16
|
作者
Liang, Cuiying [1 ]
Mei, Jie [1 ]
Liang, Yuan [1 ]
Hu, Ruwei [1 ]
Li, Li [2 ,3 ]
Kuang, Li [1 ]
机构
[1] Sun Yat Sen Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Adm, Guangzhou 510080, Guangdong, Peoples R China
[2] Case Western Reserve Univ, Dept Family Med & Community Hlth, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[3] Univ Virginia, Dept Family Med, Charlottesville, VA USA
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Gatekeeping; Primary care; Quality of primary care; Propensity score matching; Cross-sectional survey; COMMUNITY-HEALTH CENTERS; PLAN; EXPERIENCE; EFFICIENCY; REFERRALS; PHYSICIAN; SERVICES; SHENZHEN; SYSTEMS;
D O I
10.1186/s12875-019-0982-z
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
BackgroundDeveloped countries have widely implemented a gatekeeping system as a core policy of primary care, also known as the system of first visit in the community. As gatekeepers, general practitioners are responsible for the diagnosis and treatment of residents in the community health centres, andreferring patients to specialists as appropriate. After several years of healthcare reform, gatekeeping policy has achieved remarkable success in China. Shenzhen and Dongguan were the first batch of pilot cities that implemented the policy of gatekeeping. This study aims to examine the effects of gatekeeping on the quality of primary care between the gatekeeping and non-gatekeeping groups in these two pilot cities.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted in five community health centres in Shenzhen and Dongguan cities, both located within Guangdong Province, China, using a validated Chinese version of the Primary Care Assessment Tool-Adult Edition (PCAT-AE) and carrying out face-to-face interviews with patients 18years and older. Analyses were grouped according to whether or not patients had gatekeepers. Propensity Score Matching was used to control for confounding factors. A chi-square test was used to compare the factors mentioned above and an independent t-test was performed to compare the eight domains of the core functions of primary care between the two groups of patients.ResultsIn total, 765 valid questionnaires were collected for analysis, after matching the sample size were 238 pairs. All the confounding factors observed between the gatekeeping and non-gatekeeping groups were balanced. The PCAT-AE scores for first-contact utilisation (3.29>2.66, p<0.001) and coordination (2.06>1.95, p<0.05) were higher in the gatekeeping group after matching, but the domains of accessibility (1.59<1.67, p<0.05) and continuity (2.26<2.40, p<0.05) were lower. The PCAT-AE mean score was slightly higher in gatekeeping group (1.98>1.93, p>0.05) but without statistical significance.ConclusionThis study demonstrated that gatekeeping has helped to improve first-contact utilisation and coordination of primary care, but that other goals such as continuity and comprehensiveness have been harmed. To establish a sustainable gatekeeping system and to strengthen the core functions of the community comprehensively, the current gatekeeping system needs refinement.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Prevalence of multimorbidity in the adult population attending primary care in Portugal: a cross-sectional study
    Prazeres, Filipe
    Santiago, Luiz
    BMJ OPEN, 2015, 5 (09):
  • [32] A cross-sectional study of the practice types of US adult primary care physician specialists
    Young, Richard A.
    Wilkinson, Elizabeth
    Barreto, Tyler W.
    Newton, Rebecca L.
    Turebylu, Akshaj
    Bullock, Dana
    FAMILY PRACTICE, 2022, 39 (05) : 799 - 804
  • [33] Assault and Mental Disorders: A Cross-Sectional Study of Urban Adult Primary Care Patients
    Glover, Karinn
    Olfson, Mark
    Gameroff, Marc J.
    Neria, Yuval
    PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES, 2010, 61 (10) : 1018 - 1023
  • [34] Patients' experiences in community health centres under the health-care reform: research findings from a cross-sectional study using the Primary Care Assessment Tool in China
    Wang, Harry H. X.
    Wang, Jia Ji
    Wong, Samuel Y. S.
    Wong, Martin C. S.
    Wei, Xiao Lin
    Li, Donald K. T.
    Tang, Jin Ling
    Griffiths, Sian M.
    LANCET, 2015, 386 : 69 - 69
  • [35] Experiences of adult patients using primary care services in Poland – a cross-sectional study in QUALICOPC study framework
    Marek Oleszczyk
    Anna Krztoń-Królewiecka
    Willemijn L. A. Schäfer
    Wienke G. W. Boerma
    Adam Windak
    BMC Family Practice, 18
  • [36] Experiences of adult patients using primary care services in Poland - a cross-sectional study in QUALICOPC study framework
    Oleszczyk, Marek
    Krzton-Krolewiecka, Anna
    Schaefer, Willemijn L. A.
    Boerma, Wienke G. W.
    Windak, Adam
    BMC FAMILY PRACTICE, 2017, 18
  • [37] Trends in the Quality of Primary Care and Acute Care in Korea From 2008 to 2020: A Cross-sectional Study
    Gwon, Yeong Geun
    Han, Seung Jin
    Kim, Kyoung Hoon
    JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE & PUBLIC HEALTH, 2023, 56 (03): : 248 - 254
  • [38] Prenatal care in Brazil: a cross-sectional study of the Program for Improving Primary Care Access and Quality, 2014
    Neves, Rosalia Garcia
    Flores-Quispe, Maria Del Pilar
    Facchini, Luiz Augusto
    Fassa, Anaclaudia Gastal
    Tomasi, Elaine
    EPIDEMIOLOGIA E SERVICOS DE SAUDE, 2020, 29 (01):
  • [39] Consultation length, process quality and diagnosis quality of primary care in rural China: A cross-sectional standardized patient study
    Wang, Qingzhi
    Adhikari, Sasmita Poudel
    Wu, Yuju
    Sunil, Thankam S.
    Mao, Yuping
    Ye, Ruixue
    Sun, Chang
    Shi, Yaojiang
    Zhou, Chengchao
    Sylvia, Sean
    Rozelle, Scott
    Zhou, Huan
    PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2022, 105 (04) : 902 - 908
  • [40] Patient satisfaction between primary care providers and hospitals: a cross-sectional survey in Jilin province, China
    Li, Jinghua
    Wang, Pingping
    Kong, Xuan
    Liang, Hailun
    Zhang, Xiumin
    Shi, Leiyu
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR QUALITY IN HEALTH CARE, 2016, 28 (03) : 346 - 354