IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v16y2019i19p3754-d273682.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patient Input in Regional Healthcare Planning—A Meaningful Contribution

Author

Listed:
  • Heidrun Sturm

    (University Hospital Tübingen, Institute for General Practice and Interprofessional Care, Osianderstraße 5, 72076 Tübingen, Germany)

  • Miriam Colombo

    (University Hospital Tübingen, Institute for General Practice and Interprofessional Care, Osianderstraße 5, 72076 Tübingen, Germany)

  • Teresa Hebeiss

    (University Hospital Tübingen, Institute for General Practice and Interprofessional Care, Osianderstraße 5, 72076 Tübingen, Germany)

  • Stefanie Joos

    (University Hospital Tübingen, Institute for General Practice and Interprofessional Care, Osianderstraße 5, 72076 Tübingen, Germany)

  • Roland Koch

    (University Hospital Tübingen, Institute for General Practice and Interprofessional Care, Osianderstraße 5, 72076 Tübingen, Germany)

Abstract

Background: There are well-known methodological and analytical challenges in planning regional healthcare services (HCS). Increasingly, the need for data-derived planning, including user-perspectives, is discussed. This study aims to better understand the possible contribution of citizen experience in the assessment of regional HCS needs in two regions of Germany. Methods: We conducted a written survey in two regions of differing size—a community (3653 inhabitants) and a county (165,211 inhabitants). Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess the impact of sociodemographic and regional factors on the assessment of HCS provided by general practitioners (GPs) and specialists. Results: Except for age and financial resources available for one’s own health, populations did not differ significantly between the regions. However, citizens’ perception of HCS (measured by satisfaction with 1 = very good to 5 = very poor) differed clearly between different services (e.g., specialists: 3.8–4.3 and pharmacies: 1.7–2.5) as well as between regions (GPs: 1.7–3.1; therapists: 2.9–4). In the multivariate model, region (next to income and age) was a consistent predictor of the perception of GP- and specialist-provided care. Discussion: Citizens’ perceptions of HCS correspond to regional provider density (the greater the density, the better the perception) and add insights into citizens’ needs. Therefore, they can provide valuable information on regional HCS strengths and weaknesses and are a valid resource to support decision makers in shaping regional care structures.

Suggested Citation

  • Heidrun Sturm & Miriam Colombo & Teresa Hebeiss & Stefanie Joos & Roland Koch, 2019. "Patient Input in Regional Healthcare Planning—A Meaningful Contribution," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-15, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:19:p:3754-:d:273682
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/19/3754/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/19/3754/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karen Carlisle & Jane Farmer & Judy Taylor & Sarah Larkins & Rebecca Evans, 2018. "Evaluating community participation: A comparison of participatory approaches in the planning and implementation of new primary health‐care services in northern Australia," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 704-722, July.
    2. David Cutler & Jonathan Skinner & Ariel Dora Stern & David Wennberg, 2013. "Physician Beliefs and Patient Preferences: A New Look at Regional Variation in Health Care Spending," NBER Working Papers 19320, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. David Cutler & Jonathan S. Skinner & Ariel Dora Stern & David Wennberg, 2019. "Physician Beliefs and Patient Preferences: A New Look at Regional Variation in Health Care Spending," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 11(1), pages 192-221, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Currie, Janet & Kurdyak, Paul & Zhang, Jonathan, 2024. "Socioeconomic status and access to mental health care: The case of psychiatric medications for children in Ontario Canada," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    2. Anand Acharya & Lynda Khalaf & Marcel Voia & Myra Yazbeck & David Wensley, 2021. "Severity of Illness and the Duration of Intensive Care," Working Papers 2021-003, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    3. Gabriel A. Facchini Palma, 2020. "Low Staffing in the Maternity Ward: Keep Calm and Call the Surgeon," Working Papers wpdea2009, Department of Applied Economics at Universitat Autonoma of Barcelona.
    4. Spitzer, Sonja & Shaikh, Mujaheed, 2022. "Health misperception and healthcare utilisation among older Europeans," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 22(C).
    5. Fadlon, Itzik & Van Parys, Jessica, 2020. "Primary care physician practice styles and patient care: Evidence from physician exits in Medicare," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    6. Yunjie Song, 2016. "Potential Cost Savings From Reduction of Regional Variation in Medicare Spending," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(2), pages 21582440166, April.
    7. Dirk Göpffarth & Thomas Kopetsch & Hendrik Schmitz, 2016. "Determinants of Regional Variation in Health Expenditures in Germany," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(7), pages 801-815, July.
    8. Agha, Leila & Frandsen, Brigham & Rebitzer, James B., 2019. "Fragmented division of labor and healthcare costs: Evidence from moves across regions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 144-159.
    9. Danny Wende, 2019. "Spatial risk adjustment between health insurances: using GWR in risk adjustment models to conserve incentives for service optimisation and reduce MAUP," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(7), pages 1079-1091, September.
    10. Philip DeCicca & Maripier Isabelle & Natalie Malak, 2024. "How do physicians respond to new medical research?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(10), pages 2206-2228, October.
    11. Deiana, Claudio & Giua, Ludovica & Nistico, Roberto, 2019. "The Economics behind the Epidemic: Afghan Opium Price and Prescription Opioids in the US," IZA Discussion Papers 12872, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Attema, Arthur E. & Galizzi, Matteo M. & Groß, Mona & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Karay, Yassin & L’Haridon, Olivier & Wiesen, Daniel, 2023. "The formation of physician altruism," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    13. Barili, Emilia & Bertoli, Paola & Grembi, Veronica, 2021. "Neighborhoods, networks, and delivery methods," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    14. Leila Agha & Keith Marzilli Ericson & Xiaoxi Zhao, 2020. "The Impact of Organizational Boundaries on Healthcare Coordination and Utilization," NBER Working Papers 28179, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Salm, Martin & Wübker, Ansgar, 2017. "Causes of regional variation in healthcare utilization in Germany," Ruhr Economic Papers 675, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    16. Quinn, Amity E. & Trachtenberg, Aaron J. & McBrien, Kerry A. & Ogundeji, Yewande & Souri, Sepideh & Manns, Liam & Rennert-May, Elissa & Ronksley, Paul & Au, Flora & Arora, Nikita & Hemmelgarn, Brenda , 2020. "Impact of payment model on the behaviour of specialist physicians: A systematic review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(4), pages 345-358.
    17. Szklo, Michel & Clarke, Damian & Rocha, Rudi, 2024. "Does Increasing Public Spending in Health Improve Health? Lessons from a Constitutional Reform in Brazil," IZA Discussion Papers 16829, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Michael L. Barnett & Andrew Olenski & Adam Sacarny, 2023. "Common Practice: Spillovers from Medicare on Private Health Care," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 65-88, August.
    19. Alexander Ahammer & Thomas Schober, 2020. "Exploring variations in health‐care expenditures—What is the role of practice styles?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(6), pages 683-699, June.
    20. Clémence Bussière & Nicolas Sirven & Thomas Rapp & Christine Sevilla‐Dedieu, 2020. "Adherence to medical follow‐up recommendations reduces hospital admissions: Evidence from diabetic patients in France," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 508-522, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:19:p:3754-:d:273682. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.