Asthana S, Gibson A J, Parsons E M
Department of Social Policy and Social Work, University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth, UK.
Health Place. 1999 Dec;5(4):271-8. doi: 10.1016/s1353-8292(99)00017-9.
Using postcode-ED linkage to calculate patient-weighted deprivation indices for 330 general practices in southwest England, this study examines whether the populations served by fundholding and non-fundholding practices varied with respect to socio-economic status. Little evidence is found of systematic socio-economic bias in the uptake of fundholding. However, a distinct spatial pattern to the distribution of fundholding is revealed in this article, urban practices having adopted the scheme more readily than their rural and mixed rural/urban counterparts. As practice-level fundholding is replaced by commissioning at the locality level, such geographical variation is likely to be expressed in the way in which primary care groups evolve.
本研究利用邮编与急诊部门的关联,为英格兰西南部的330家普通诊所计算患者加权贫困指数,以检验实行基金持有制和非基金持有制的诊所所服务的人群在社会经济地位方面是否存在差异。几乎没有证据表明在采用基金持有制方面存在系统性的社会经济偏见。然而,本文揭示了基金持有制分布的一种明显空间模式,城市诊所比农村诊所及城乡混合诊所更愿意采用该方案。随着诊所层面的基金持有制被地方层面的委托制所取代,这种地理差异可能会在初级保健团体的发展方式中体现出来。