Two Models of Primary Health Care Development: Russia vs. Central and Eastern European Countries

The paper explores primary health care models in Russia and in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries. Starting with the similar model, they have taken totally different ways of primary health care transformation, including the role of general practitioner, multi-specialty polyclinics and private sector. The comparison of this diversity, based on the conceptual framework of Primary Health Care Activity Monitor in Europe, demonstrated that the scores of primary care in Russia are relatively lower, particularly in the dimensions of accessibility, comprehensiveness, continuity and coordination of care. The score of the selected efficiency indicators is also relatively low. The major reasons for this are discussed, including the lack of strategic vision on the role of primary care, an excessive specialization of primary care and the delay with a shift to a general practitioner model. A debatable issue of primary care extended composition (the involvement of a growing number of specialists) is also addressed. The conceptual presumption that an extended composition presents new opportunities for more integrated care and better performance has not been supported by the evidence. Big multi-specialty policlinics in Russia don’t demonstrate advantages over solo and group GP practices that dominate in CEE countries. The potential of polyclinics is not used because of the lack of specific activities for integration. It is argued that new specialists in the practices can strengthen primary care only when they support generalists rather than replace them. The lesson learnt from CEE countries is that substantial changes are needed to overcome the lagging status of primary care in Russia, including overcoming the excessive specialization of primary care, the replacement of district physicians by general practitioners, developing the forms of independent practices operating in parallel with polyclinics and competing with them