University of Tartu, Department of Internal Medicine, Tartu, Estonia.
Health Policy. 2013 Feb;109(2):122-30. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.08.015. Epub 2012 Sep 7.
This study aims to compare the organisation of primary care (PC) systems in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, focusing on the structure and process of service delivery, and to discuss the suitability of the PHAMEU instrument for international comparison of PC systems.
The data were collected in the framework of PHAMEU project during 2009-2010. The selected indicators were used to describe and compare the structure and process of PC in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.
The results showed that the coordination of PC services, legislative framework, service delivery, quality requirements and PC financing principles are rather similar in all three Baltic countries. Population coverage for PC services, cost sharing for some services, and the employment status of family doctors differs by country. The PHAMEU instrument was most applicable for the description and comparison of the structure of PC and some aspects of the process. Information about patient outcome and quality of care was neither available nor reliable enough.
The development of PC systems in Baltic countries has been rather similar, but some aspects also differ between the countries. Use of a standardized instrument allows for international comparison, but assumes standardised data collection procedures in comparable countries.
本研究旨在比较爱沙尼亚、拉脱维亚和立陶宛的初级保健(PC)系统组织,重点关注服务提供的结构和流程,并讨论 PHAMEU 工具在 PC 系统国际比较中的适用性。
数据是在 2009-2010 年 PHAMEU 项目框架内收集的。选择的指标用于描述和比较爱沙尼亚、拉脱维亚和立陶宛的 PC 结构和流程。
结果表明,在所有三个波罗的海国家,PC 服务的协调、立法框架、服务提供、质量要求和 PC 融资原则都相当相似。PC 服务的覆盖人群、某些服务的费用分担以及家庭医生的就业状况因国家而异。PHAMEU 工具最适用于描述和比较 PC 的结构以及某些流程方面。有关患者结果和护理质量的信息既不可用也不可靠。
波罗的海国家的 PC 系统发展相当相似,但各国之间也存在一些差异。使用标准化工具允许进行国际比较,但假设在可比国家中采用标准化的数据收集程序。