Search results

THIS ARTICLE APPRAISES the Government's White Paper, The New NHS: Modern, Dependable, from the perspective of a health authority chief executive, outlining the context for developing health care, the joint challenges of the White Paper and the Green Paper, Our Healthier Nation, the role and potential of primary care groups (in detail), the developing role of the health authority, and the agenda for shaping and improving the delivery of health and health services. It ends with an appraisal of particular implications for community care.

The Models of Child Health Appraised (MOCHA) project identified the different models of primary care that exist for children, examined the particular attributes that might be different from those directed at adults and considered how these models might be appraised. The project took the multiple and interrelated dimensions of primary care and simplified them into a conceptual framework for appraisal. A general description of the models in existence in all 30 countries of the EU and EEA countries, focusing on lead practitioner, financial and regulatory and service provision classifications, was created. We then used the WHO ‘building blocks’ for high-performing health systems as a starting point for identifying a good system for children. The building blocks encompass safe and good quality services from an educated and empowered workforce, providing good data systems, access to all necessary medical products, prevention and treatments, and a service that is adequately financed and well led. An extensive search of the literature failed to identify a suitable appraisal framework for MOCHA, because none of the frameworks focused on child primary care in its own right. This led the research team to devise an alternative conceptualisation, at the heart of which is the core theme of child centricity and ecology, and the need to focus on delivery to the child through the life course. The MOCHA model also focuses on the primary care team and the societal and environmental context of the primary care system.

To examine a local primary health care infrastructure and the reality of primary health care from the perspective of residents of a small, urban community in the southern United States.

Data were derived from 13 semistructured focus groups, plus three semistructured interviews, and were analyzed inductively consistent with a grounded theory approach.

Structural barriers to the local primary health care infrastructure include transportation, clinic and appointment wait time, and co-payments and health insurance. Hidden barriers consist of knowledge about local health care services, nonphysician gatekeepers, and fear of medical care. Community residents have used home remedies and the emergency department at the local academic medical center to manage these structural and hidden barriers.

Findings might not generalize to primary health care infrastructures in other communities, respondent perspectives can be biased, and the data are subject to various interpretations and conceptual and thematic frameworks. Nevertheless, the structural and hidden barriers to the local primary health care infrastructure have considerably diminished the autonomy community residents have been able to exercise over their decisions about primary health care, ultimately suggesting that efforts concerned with increasing the access of medically underserved groups to primary health care in local communities should recognize the centrality and significance of power.

This study addresses a gap in the sociological literature regarding the impact of specific barriers to primary health care among medically underserved groups.

There is considerable heterogeneity between primary care systems that have evolved in individual national cultural environments. Models of Child Health Appraised (MOCHA) studied how the transfer of models or their individual components can be achieved across nations, using examples of combinations of settings, functions, target groups and tracer conditions. There are many factors that determine the feasibility of successful transfer of these from one setting to another, which must be recognised and taken into account. These include the environment of the care system, national policy-making and contextual means of directing population behaviour – in the form of penalties and incentives, which cannot be assessed or expected to work by means of rational actions alone. MOCHA developed a list of criteria to assess transferability, summarised in a population characteristics, intervention content, environment and transfer (PIET-T) process. To explore the process and means of transferability, we obtained consensus statements from the researchers on optimum model scenarios and conducted a survey of stakeholders, professionals and users of children’s primary care services that involved three specific health topics: vaccination coverage in infants, monitoring of a chronic or complex condition and early recognition of mental health problems. The results give insight into features of transferability – such as the availability and the use of guidelines and formal procedures; the barriers and facilitators of implementation and similarities and differences between model practices and the existing model of child primary care in the country. We found that successful transfer of an optimal model is impossible without tailoring the model to a specific country setting. It is vital to be aware of the sensitivity of the population and environmental characteristics of a country before starting to change the system of primary care.

This chapter explores how primary care physicians deliver mental health treatment for Medicaid patients in one county in the United States, and how treatment may have changed after HMO enrollment with a mental health carve-out. We utilize Lipsky's theory of street-level bureaucracy to better understand how primary care physicians treat Medicaid patients for depression and what types of insurance arrangements support or inhibit that treatment. Exploratory interviews with 20 physicians revealed that the patient's status as a non-voluntary client, service system barriers and physicians’ commitment to treatment caused them to bear primary responsibility for the majority of depression care. Physicians were willing to act as advocates for their clients and viewed such advocacy as ethical given the lack of mental health parity. In general, primary care physicians were not familiar with new policies dictating mental health carve-outs for Medicaid patients, nor were they concerned with how mental health care was reimbursed for their patients. However, they were willing to provide mental health care even if they were not reimbursed. Physicians rely upon medication management to treat depression, and reimbursement plays a role in the amount of time spent with patients and in the coding used for the visit. Lipsky's (1980) theory of street-level bureaucracy provides a useful framework for understanding how physicians will act as advocates for their clients in the face of structural as well as resource constraints on health care.

Given that the workforce constitutes a principal resource of primary care, appraisal of models of care requires thorough investigation of the health workforce in all Models of Child Health Appraised (MOCHA) countries. This chapter explores this in terms of workforce composition, remuneration, qualifications and training in relation to the needs of children and young people. We have focused on two principal disciplines of primary care; medicine and nursing, with a specific focus on training and skills to care for children in primary care, particularly those with complex care needs, adolescents and vulnerable groups. We found significant disparities in workforce provision and remuneration, in training curricula and in resultant skills of physicians and nurses in European Union and European Economic Area Countries. A lack of overarching standards and recognition of some of the specific needs of children reflected in training of physicians and nurses may lead to suboptimal care for children. There are, of course, many other professions that also contribute to primary care services for children, some of which are discussed in Chapter 15, but we have not had resources to study these to the same detail.

There is more to primary care than solely medical and nursing services. Models of Child Health Appraised (MOCHA) explored the role of the professions of pharmacy, dental health and social care as examples of affiliate contributors to primary care in providing health advice and treatment to children and young people. Pharmacies are much used, but their value as a resource for children seems to be insufficiently recognised in most European Union (EU) and European Economic Area (EEA) countries. Advice from a pharmacist is invaluable, particularly because many medicines for children are only available off-label, or not available in the correct dose, access to a pharmacist for simple queries around certain health issues is often easier and quicker than access to a primary care physician or nursing service. Preventive dentistry is available throughout the EU and EEA, but there are few targeted incentives to ensure all children receive the service, and accessibility to dental treatment is variable, particularly for disabled children or those with specific health needs. Social care services are an essential part of health care for many extremely vulnerable children, for example those with complex care needs. Mapping social care services and the interaction with health services is challenging due to their fragmented provision and the variability of access across the EU and EEA. A lack of coherent structure of the health and social care interface requires parents or other family members to navigate complex systems with little assistance. The needs of pharmacy, dentistry and social care are varied and interwoven with needs from each other and from the healthcare system. Yet, because this inter-connectivity is not sufficiently recognised in the EU and EEA countries, there is a need for improvement of coordination and with the need for these services to focus more fully on children and young people.

The race concordance hypothesis suggests that matching patients and health providers on the basis of race improves communication and patients’ perceptions of health care, and by extension, encourages patients to seek and utilize health care, which may reduce health disparities. However, relatively few studies have examined the impact of race concordance on the utilization of health services. This chapter is grounded on Andersen’s Emerging Model of Health Services Utilization (Phase 4) and extends that model to include race concordance.

The data were collected from a stratified random sample of adult beneficiaries enrolled in North Carolina Medicaid’s primary care case management delivery system in 2006–2007. Propensity score matching techniques were used to sort respondents on their propensity for race concordance and indices were constructed to generate key control variables. Poisson regression was used to examine the impact of race concordance on the utilization of primary care and emergency room care, under the assumption that race concordance would increase the use of primary care and decrease the use of emergency care for minority patients.

While blacks (compared to whites) used less primary care and had more emergency care visits, race concordance was not a statistically significant predictor of either primary care or emergency room use. However, patients’ satisfaction with their primary care providers was associated with significantly fewer primary care and emergency care visits while trust in one’s provider was associated with more primary care visits.

The study findings suggest that the central premises of the race concordance hypothesis require further study to confirm the assumption that better patient – primary care provider relationships result in less utilization of more costly and resource-intensive forms of health care.

The study makes a valuable contribution by expanding the relatively small body of literature dedicated to exploring the impact of race concordance on health services utilization. Additionally, by virtue of researching the experience of Medicaid enrollees, the study controls for health insurance status.

The purpose of this paper is to examine race, gender and language concordance in terms of importance to primary care.

The 2003 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Household Component (MEPS) was used. Four distinguishing primary care attributes and selected measures were operationalized primarily from a sample subset that identified a usual source of care (USC): accessibility to USC; interface between primary care and specialist services; treatment decisions; and preventive services received from the USC. Bivariate and multivariate results are reported.

Adjusting for covariates, the following items remained statistically significant: race – choosing primary care physician as USC, USC having office hours, and going to USC for new health problems; gender – choosing primary care physician as USC and USC having office hours; and language – lack of difficulty contacting the USC after hours. However, these items appear to be isolated cases rather than indicators that concordance plays a key role in determining primary care quality. Language barriers/communication issues are the only areas where improvement appears warranted.

While the study has strong accessibility and interpersonal relationship measures, service coordination and comprehensiveness indicators are limited. The analyses' cross‐sectional nature also poses a problem in drawing causal relationships and conclusive findings. Finally, sample size limitations preclude stratified analyses across racial/ethnic groups, an important consideration as the relationships between concordance and quality may vary across groups.

This study indicates that more research is needed in this area to determine future resource allocation and policy direction.

The unique contribution of the study is to suggest that race and gender concordance may not accurately predict primary health care quality.