McLeod Logan, Buckley Gioia, Sweetman Arthur
Lazaridis School of Business & Economics (McLeod), Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ont.; Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis (Buckley) and Department of Economics (Sweetman), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.
CMAJ Open. 2016 Nov 22;4(4):E679-E688. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20160069. eCollection 2016 Oct-Dec.
Between 2001 and 2006, the Ontario government introduced a menu of new primary care models, with elements such as patient enrolment and minimum group sizes, and various combinations of fee-for-service, capitation, pay-for-performance and salary. From the statistical perspective of physicians, as opposed to patients, we looked at the distribution of physician characteristics, group size and patient visit patterns across models to describe primary care practice in Ontario.
Using administrative data for fiscal year 2010/11 containing information on physician characteristics, patient rostering status, patient visits and other practice information, we described similarities and differences across primary care models.
Our sample included 11 626 family physicians. Compared with physicians in the new primary care models, physicians in fee-for-service models are much more likely to work part-time and many, particularly younger and female physicians, do not work in full-year full-scope practices. Among the new primary care models, physicians in capitated models are slightly younger, are less likely to be an international medical graduate, work in smaller physician teams and do not practice in urban areas. On average, physicians saw and rostered 1888 patients. Although there is still substantial variation within each model, fee-for-service physicians saw the fewest patients; physicians in capitated models saw somewhat more, and those in the noncapitated models saw the most patients.
Practice and physician characteristics vary systematically across models. A high percentage of rostered patients see physicians outside the group with which they are rostered. Group-based primary care models may not have a large impact on group integration and continuity in the provision of primary care services.
2001年至2006年期间,安大略省政府推出了一系列新的初级保健模式,包括患者注册和最小团队规模等要素,以及按服务收费、按人头付费、绩效薪酬和薪资等多种组合方式。从医生而非患者的统计角度出发,我们研究了不同模式下医生特征、团队规模和患者就诊模式的分布情况,以描述安大略省的初级保健实践。
利用2010/11财年的行政数据,其中包含医生特征、患者注册状态、患者就诊及其他实践信息,我们描述了不同初级保健模式之间的异同。
我们的样本包括11626名家庭医生。与新初级保健模式下的医生相比,按服务收费模式下的医生更有可能兼职工作,而且许多医生,尤其是年轻医生和女医生,并非全年从事全面服务的工作。在新初级保健模式中,按人头付费模式下的医生略年轻,不太可能是国际医学毕业生,在规模较小的医生团队中工作,且不在城市地区执业。平均而言,医生诊治并注册了1888名患者。尽管每种模式内部仍存在很大差异,但按服务收费的医生诊治的患者最少;按人头付费模式下的医生诊治的患者略多一些,而非按人头付费模式下的医生诊治的患者最多。
不同模式下的实践和医生特征存在系统性差异。很大比例的注册患者会去看与其注册团队之外的医生。基于团队的初级保健模式可能对初级保健服务提供过程中的团队整合和连续性影响不大。