4.3 Article

Choosing between public and private or between hospital and primary care: responsiveness, patient-centredness and prescribing patterns in outpatient consultations in Bangkok

期刊

TROPICAL MEDICINE & INTERNATIONAL HEALTH
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 81-89

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2005.01532.x

关键词

responsiveness; patient-centred care; medicalization; outpatient care; cost; simulated patients; prescribing; public-private; consumer protection

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE To document differences in provider behaviour between private and public providers in hospital outpatient departments, health centres and clinics in Bangkok, Thailand. METHODS Analysis of the characteristics of 211 taped consultations with simulated patients. RESULTS Private hospitals and clinics were significantly more responsive. Private clinics but not private hospitals were also significantly more patient-centred. All doctors, but particularly those in private hospitals, prescribed unnecessary and potentially harmful technical investigations and drugs. The direct cost to the patient varied between 1.5 (in public health centres) and 12 (in private hospitals) times the minimum daily wage. The combined cost - to the patient and to the state - in public hospitals and health centres exceeded the cost of consultations in private clinics. CONCLUSION Market incentives favour responsiveness and a patient-centred approach, but not more appropriate therapeutic decisions. Excessive use of pharmaceuticals is observed among public as well as private providers, but is most pronounced in private hospitals. If patients in Bangkok want to maximize responsiveness and degree of patient-centred care and yet minimize costs and iatrogenesis, they would benefit from avoiding hospitals, both public and private, and, to a lesser extent, specialists. Choosing to use primary facilities, health centres and clinics, particularly when consultations are carried out by general practitioners (GPs), is more beneficial than choosing between public and private providers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据