Victoor A, Noordman J, Potappel A, Meijers M, Kloek C J J, de Jong J D
Nivel (Netherlands institute for health services research), PO Box 1568, 3500, BN, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Radboud university medical center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Primary and Community Care, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Feb 28;19(1):141. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-3966-8.
Generally, a significant portion of healthcare spending consists of out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses. Patients indicate that, in practice, there are often some OOP expenses, incurred when they receive medical care, which are unexpected for them and should have been taken into account when deciding on a course of action. Patients are often reliant on their GP and may, therefore, expect their GP to provide them with information about the costs of treatment options, taking into consideration their individual insurance plan. This also applies to the Netherlands, where OOP expenses increased rapidly over the years. In the current study, we observed the degree to which matters around patients' insurance and OOP expenses are discussed in the Netherlands, using video recordings of consultations between patients and GPs.
Video recordings were collected from patient-GP consultations in 2015-2016. In 2015, 20 GPs and 392 patients from the eastern part of the Netherlands participated. In 2016, another eight GPs and 102 patients participated, spread throughout the Netherlands. The consultations were coded by three observers using an observation protocol. We achieved an almost perfect inter-rater agreement (Kappa = .82).
In total, 475 consultations were analysed. In 9.5% of all the consultations, issues concerning patients' health insurance and OOP expenses were discussed. The reimbursement of the cost of medication was discussed most often and patients' current insurance and co-payments least often. In some consultations, the GP brought up the subject, while in others, the patient initiated the discussion.
While GPs may often be in the position to provide patients with information about treatment alternatives, few patients discuss the financial effects of their referral or prescription with their GP. This result complies with existing literature. Policy makers, GPs and insurers should think about how GPs and patients can be facilitated when considering the OOP expenses of treatment. There are several factors why this study, analysing video recordings of routine GP consultations in the Netherlands, is particularly relevant: Dutch GPs play a gatekeeper function; OOP expenses have increased relatively swiftly; and patients have both the right to decide on their treatment, and to choose a provider.
一般来说,医疗保健支出的很大一部分由自付费用(OOP)构成。患者表示,在实际就医过程中,他们接受医疗护理时往往会产生一些自付费用,这些费用对他们来说是意外的,在决定治疗方案时应该予以考虑。患者通常依赖他们的全科医生(GP),因此可能期望全科医生根据他们的个人保险计划,为他们提供有关治疗方案费用的信息。这在荷兰也同样适用,近年来荷兰的自付费用增长迅速。在本研究中,我们通过患者与全科医生会诊的视频记录,观察了荷兰在多大程度上讨论了患者保险和自付费用相关事宜。
收集了2015 - 2016年患者与全科医生会诊的视频记录。2015年,来自荷兰东部的20名全科医生和392名患者参与。2016年,另外8名全科医生和102名患者参与,分布在荷兰各地。由三名观察员使用观察协议对会诊进行编码。我们实现了几乎完美的评分者间一致性(卡帕系数 = 0.82)。
总共分析了475次会诊。在所有会诊中,有9.5%讨论了与患者健康保险和自付费用相关的问题。药物费用报销讨论得最为频繁,而患者当前的保险和共同支付讨论得最少。在一些会诊中,是全科医生提出这个话题,而在其他会诊中,则是患者发起讨论。
虽然全科医生通常能够为患者提供有关治疗选择的信息,但很少有患者与他们的全科医生讨论转诊或处方的财务影响。这一结果与现有文献相符。政策制定者、全科医生和保险公司应考虑在考虑治疗的自付费用时,如何为全科医生和患者提供便利。本研究通过分析荷兰全科医生常规会诊的视频记录具有特别相关性,原因有几个:荷兰全科医生发挥着守门人的作用;自付费用增长相对迅速;患者既有决定治疗的权利,也有选择医疗服务提供者的权利。