Search

Paediatric attendances at the emergency department (ED) are often admitted to the hospital less than 24 h to allow time for more extended evaluation. Innovative organisational models could prevent these hospital admissions without compromising safety or quality of delivered care. Therefore, this systematic review identifies evidence on organisational models at the ED with the primary aim to reduce hospital admissions among paediatric patients. Following the PRISMA guidelines, three bibliographic databases (Ovid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were searched. Studies on organisational models in Western countries, published between January 2009 and January 2021, which applied a comparative design or review and studied at least hospital admission rates, were included. Analyses were mainly descriptive because of the high heterogeneity among included publications. The primary outcome is hospital admission rates. Secondary outcomes are ED length of stay (LOS), waiting time, and patient satisfaction. Sixteen publications described several innovative organisational models ranging from the creation of dedicated units for paediatric patients, innovative staffing models to bringing paediatric critical care physicians to patients at rural EDs. However, the effect on hospital admission rates and other outcomes are inconclusive, and some organisational models may improve certain outcomes in certain settings or vice versa. It appears that a paediatric consultation liaison team has the most consistent effect on hospital admission rates and LOS of paediatric patients presenting with mental problems at the ED. Implementing new innovative organisational models at the ED for paediatric patients could be worthwhile to decrease hospital admissions. However, the existing evidence is of rather weak quality. Future service developments should, therefore, be conducted in a way that allows objective evaluation.

Intensive care unit (ICU) nurses are at an increased risk of burnout and may have an intention-to-leave their jobs. The COVID-19 pandemic may increase this risk.The objective of this study was to describe the prevalence of burnout risk and intention-to-leave the job and nursing profession among ICU nurses and to analyse the relationships between these variables and the work environment after two years of the COVID-19 pandemic.A national cross-sectional survey of all nurses working in Belgian ICUs was conducted between December 2021 and January 2022 during the 4th and 5th waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium. The Practice Environment Scale of the Nursing Work Index (PES-NWI) was used to measure the work environment, intention-to-leave the hospital and/or the profession was assessed. The risk of burnout was assessed using the Maslach Burnout Inventory scale including emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation, and reduced personal accomplishment.Nurses in 78 out of 123 Belgian hospital sites with an ICU participated in the survey.2321 out of 4851 nurses (47.8%) completed the entire online survey.The median overall risk of burnout per hospital site (high risk in all three subdimensions) was 17.6% [P25: 10.0 - P75: 28.8] and the median proportion of nurses with a high risk in at least one subdimension of burnout in Belgian ICUs was 71.6% [56.7-82.7]. A median of 42.9% [32.1-57.1] of ICU nurses stated that they intended-to-leave the job and 23.8% [15.4-36.8] stated an intent-to-leave the profession. The median overall score of agreement with the presence of positive aspects in the work environment was 49.0% [44.8-55.8]. Overall, nurses working in the top 25% of best-performing hospital sites with regard to work environment had a statistically significant lower risk of burnout and intention-to-leave the job and profession compared to those in the lowest performing 25% of hospital sites. Patient-to-nurse ratio in the worst performing quartile was associated with a higher risk for emotional exhaustion (OR = 1.53, 95% CI:1.04-2.26) and depersonalisation (OR = 1.48, 95% CI:1.03-2.13) and intention-to-leave the job (OR = 1.46, 95% CI:1.03-2.05).In this study, a high prevalence of burnout risk and intention-to-leave the job and nursing profession was observed after two years of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, there was substantial variation across hospital sites which was associated with the quality of the work environment."Burnoutintention to leave was high for Belgian ICU nurses after 2 years of COVID, but wellbeing was better with high quality work environments and more favourable patient to nurse ratios".

Background: Numerous studies have shown that during out-of-hours vulnerable patients (regarding low-education and unemployment) are more likely to seek medical help in the emergency department (ED). However, little is known about why patients seek help in the ED during daytime hours and if these reasons differ among self-referring socioeconomic groups. Objectives: To identify the reasons why patients opt for the ED during daytime hours when primary care services are available and identify possible social differences between socioeconomic groups. Methods: In 2014–2015, trained fieldworkers surveyed 723 patients visiting four EDs in Flanders using a structured interview. These quantitative data were analysed using descriptive and logistic regression analyses. Results: More than one-third of the self-referring patients reported that they attend the ED during daytime hours because they perceive their (health) problem as urgent and expect they need advanced diagnostic testing. Self-referred and low-educated patients have a 1.8 higher chance (compared to their higher-educated counterparts) of attending the ED because they expect advanced diagnostic testing. Self-referred and unemployed patients have a 3.6, 2.5 and 4.4 higher chance (compared to their employed counterparts) to opt for the ED because it is their usual source of care, family/friends refer them or they postpone care too long, respectively. Conclusion: We found sociodemographic differences in motives why self-referring patients in Flanders opt for the ED during daytime hours. In general, self-referring patients attend the ED because they perceive their condition as urgent and think they may need advanced diagnostic testing.

Aim: This article synthesises the results of a large international study on primary care (PC), the QUALICOPC study. Background: Since the Alma Ata Declaration, strengthening PC has been high on the policy agenda. PC is associated with positive health outcomes, but it is unclear how care processes and structures relate to patient experiences. Methods: Survey data were collected during 2011–2013 from approximately 7000 PC physicians and 70 000 patients in 34, mainly European, countries. The data on the patients are linked to data on the PC physicians within each country and analysed using multilevel modelling. Findings: Patients had more positive experiences when their PC physician provided a broader range of services. However, a broader range of services is also associated with higher rates of hospitalisations for uncontrolled diabetes, but rates of avoidable diabetes-related hospitalisations were lower in countries where patients had a continuous relationship with PC physicians. Additionally, patients with a long-term relationship with their PC physician were less likely to attend the emergency department. Capitation payment was associated with more positive patient experiences. Mono- and multidisciplinary co-location was related to improved processes in PC, but the experiences of patients visiting multidisciplinary practices were less positive. A stronger national PC structure and higher overall health care expenditures are related to more favourable patient experiences for continuity and comprehensiveness. The study also revealed inequities: patients with a migration background reported less positive experiences. People with lower incomes more often postponed PC visits for financial reasons. Comprehensive and accessible care processes are related to less postponement of care. Conclusions: The study revealed room for improvement related to patient-reported experiences and highlighted the importance of core PC characteristics including a continuous doctor–patient relationship as well as a broad range of services offered by PC physicians.

Recent figures show that discrimination in healthcare is still persistent in the European Union. Research has confirmed these results but focused mainly on the outcomes of perceived discrimination. Studies that take into account socioeconomic determinants of discrimination limit themselves to either ethnicity, income or education. This article explores the influence of several socioeconomic indicators (e.g. gender, age, income, education and ethnicity) on perceived discrimination in 30 European countries. Data from the QUALICOPC study were used. These data were collected between October 2011 and December 2013 in the participating countries. In total, 7183 GPs (general practitioners) and 61932 patients participated in the study, which had an average response rate of 74.1%. Data collection was co-ordinated by NIVEL (Dutch Institute for Research of Health Care). Bivariate binomial logistic regressions were used to estimate the impact of each socioeconomic indicator on perceived discrimination. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to estimate the unique effect of each indicator. Results indicate that in Europe, overall 7% of the respondents felt discriminated, ranging between 1.4% and 12.8% at the country level. With regard to socioeconomic determinants in perceived discrimination, income and age are both important indicators, with lower income groups and younger people having a higher chance to feel discriminated. In addition, we find significant influences of education, gender, age and ethnicity in several countries. In most countries, higher educated people, older people, women and the indigenous population appeared to feel less discriminated. In conclusion, perceived discrimination in healthcare is reported in almost all European countries, but there is large variation between European countries. A high prevalence of perceived discrimination within a country also does not imply a correlation between socioeconomic indicators and perceived discrimination.

Recent research has shown that ethnic minorities still have less access to medical care and are less satisfied with the treatment they receive and the outcomes of the health care process. This article assesses how migrants in Europe experience access, treatment and outcomes in the European health care systems. Data were obtained from the QUALICOPC study (Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe). Regression analyses were used to estimate the access, treatment and outcomes of care for ethnic minorities. In several countries, migrants experience that the opening hours of their GP practice were too limited and indicate that the practice was too far away from their work or home (lower access). They are more likely to report negative patient–doctor communication and less continuity of care than native patients (worse treatment). In addition, they are less satisfied with the care they received and are more likely to postpone care (worse outcomes). In general, migrants are still disadvantaged during the health care process. However, our results also indicate that satisfaction with the health care process improves for second-generation migrants in comparison with first-generation migrants.

BACKGROUND: Previous research has shown that person-centred care has beneficial effects on several health-related outcomes. We investigated the association between a general practitioner's person-centred attitude and financially driven postponement of care in European countries. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, data were collected within the Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe study, which included 69 201 patients and 7183 general practitioners from 31 European countries (all 27 European Union member states, 2 candidate states [former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkey], Norway and Switzerland). Financially driven postponement of care was measured by asking patients whether they had postponed care for financial reasons in the previous 12 months. We constructed a variable for person-centredness using a previously published conceptual framework: 1) exploring both the disease and the illness experience, 2) understanding the whole person, 3) finding common ground and 4) enhancing the patient-physician relationship. We analyzed the data using multilevel logistic regression modelling, adjusting for the strength of a country's primary care system. RESULTS: Having a low income was associated with higher financially driven postponement of care. General practitioners with a person-centred attitude were associated with lower rates of financially driven postponement among their patients. An increase in general practitioners' person-centredness with 1 standard deviation was associated with a decreased likelihood of postponement of care for financial reasons (odds ratio 0.923, 95% confidence interval 0.869-0.981). INTERPRETATION: Person-centred care by general practitioners in Europe was associated with lower financially driven postponement of care, irrespective of the strength of a country's primary care system.

Background Patient safety is a quality indicator for primary care and it should be based on individual needs, and not differ among different social groups. Nevertheless, the attention on social disparities in patient safety has been mainly directed towards the hospital care, often overlooking the primary care setting. Therefore, this paper aims to synthesise social disparities in patient safety in the primary care setting. Methods The Databases PubMed and Web of Science were searched for relevant studies published between January 1st 2006 and January 31st 2017. Papers investigating racial, gender and socioeconomic disparities in regards to administrative errors, diagnostic errors, medication errors and transition of care errors in primary care were included. No distinction in terms of participants’ age was made. Results Women and black patients are more likely to experience patient safety events in primary care, although it depends on the type of disease, treatment, and healthcare service. The available literature largely describes gender and ethnic disparities in the different patient safety domains whilst income and educational level are studied to a lesser extent. Conclusions The results of this systematic review suggest that vulnerable social groups are likely to experience adverse patient safety events in primary care. Enhancing family doctors’ awareness of these inequities is a necessary first step to tackle them and improve patient safety for all patients. Future research should focus on social disparities in patient safety using socioeconomic indicators, such as income and education.

Income inequality has been clearly associated with reduced population health. A body of evidence suggests that a strong primary care system may mitigate this negative association. The aim of this study is to assess the strength of the primary care system's effect on the inverse association between income inequality and health in Europe. Health is operationalised using four cross-sectional outcomes: self-rated health, life expectancy, mental well-being, and infant mortality. Strength of the primary care system is measured using the framework of the Primary Health Care Activity Monitor Europe, and income inequality by the Gini coefficient. Multiple regression models with interaction terms were used. The results confirm that especially the structure and continuity dimension of primary care strength can buffer the inverse association between income inequality and health. European policymakers should therefore focus on strengthening primary care systems in order to reduce inequity in health.

Item does not contain fulltext OBJECTIVE: To describe social differences in postponing a general practitioner visit in 31 European countries and to explore whether primary care strength is associated with postponement rates. DATA SOURCES: Between October 2011 and December 2013, the multicountry QUALICOPC study collected data on 61,931 patients and 7,183 general practitioners throughout Europe. STUDY DESIGN: Access to primary care was measured by asking the patients whether they postponed a general practitioner visit in the past year. Social differences were described according to patients' self-rated household income, education, ethnicity, and gender. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Data were analyzed using multivariable and multilevel binomial logistic regression analyses. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: According to the variance-decomposition in the multilevel analysis, most of the variance can be explained by patient characteristics. Postponement of general practitioner care is higher for patients with a low self-rated household income, a low education level, and a migration background. In addition, although the point estimates are consistent with a substantial effect, no statistically significant association between primary care strength and postponement in the 31 countries is determined. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the universal and egalitarian goals of health care systems, access to general practitioner care in Europe is still determined by patients' socioeconomic status (self-rated household income and education) and migration background.

Access to healthcare is inequitably distributed across different socioeconomic groups. Several vulnerable groups experience barriers in accessing healthcare, compared to their more wealthier counterparts. In response to this, many countries use resources to strengthen their primary care (PC) system, because in many European countries PC is the first entry point to the healthcare system and plays a central role in the coordination of patients through the healthcare system. However it is unclear whether this strengthening of PC leads to less inequity in access to the whole healthcare system. This study investigates the association between strength indicators of PC and inequity in unmet need by merging data from the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions database (2013) and the Primary Healthcare Activity Monitor for Europe (2010). The analyses reveal a significant association between the Gini coefficient for income inequality and inequity in unmet need. When the Gini coefficient of a country is one SD higher, the social inequity in unmet need in that particular country will be 4.960 higher. Furthermore, the accessibility and the workforce development of a country's PC system is inverse associated with the social inequity of unmet need. More specifically, when the access- and workforce development indicator of a country PC system are one standard deviation higher, the inequity in unmet healthcare needs are respectively 2.200 and 4.951 lower. Therefore, policymakers should focus on reducing income inequality to tackle inequity in access, and strengthen PC (by increasing accessibility and better-developing its workforce) as this can influence inequity in unmet need.

Politici en stakeholders beschouwen een gelijke toegang tot de gezondheidszorg en een evenwaardige zorg voor iedereen steeds vaker als prioriteit bij het uitstippelen van beleidsplannen. Kant-en-klaar recepten om de gezondheidsverschillen tussen sociale groepen in onze maatschappij weg te werken, bestaan echter niet. Maar zijn er toch een aantal gemene delers?

We study whether migrants' health in Europe is associated with the cultural distance between their host country and country of origin. To this end, we run multilevel regression models on data merging (i) self-rated health and social background of more than 3,800 migrants from the European Social Survey with (ii) an index of cultural distance based on country differences in values, norms and attitudes measured in the World Values Survey. We find that higher levels of cultural distance are associated with worse health of migrants. This association is comparable in size to the negative association between health and female gender (compared to male gender) but less important than the association between health and education level. In addition, this association is less significant among second-generation migrants than among first-generation migrants.

Objective: This study aims to explore social differences in patient satisfaction of their general practitioner (GP) according to patient's gender, education, household income and ethnicity in Europe. Design: By using multilevel logistic modelling the impact of socioeconomic indicators (i.e. gender, education, household income and ethnicity) on patient satisfaction is estimated. In each model the authors controlled for indicators of person-focused care and strength of the primary care system. Setting: Primary care in 31 European countries. Participants: Patients who were sitting in the waiting room of the GP were asked to participate. They filled in the questionnaire after the consultation with the GP. Intervention: Describing social differences in patient satisfaction among European primary care patients. Main Outcome Measure(s): Patient satisfaction. Results: This study confirms previous research and reveals high levels of satisfaction with primary care in Europe. On average, 92.1% of the respondents would recommend their GP to their family or relatives. Variance in patient satisfaction is mostly explained at patient level, similar to 75% of the variance can be assigned to patient characteristics. Likewise, women, low-income groups and first generation migrants are less satisfied with their GP. Lastly, all indicators of person-focused care are positively associated with patient satisfaction, showing that the more person-focused the care, the higher the satisfaction among the patients. Conclusions: Notwithstanding the high satisfaction rates in Europe, patient satisfaction is still determined by patients' socioeconomic status (gender and household income), migration background and the degree of person-centred care. Therefore, policymakers and health professionals should target these population groups in order to improve the satisfaction rates in their country.

Background: Overcrowding of emergency departments (ED) during out-of-hours health care is a common problem in many Western countries. An appealing alternative for ED’s is the general practices cooperatives (GPC): regional networks of GP’s during the out-of-hours. The aim of this study is to investigate the socio-economic determinants of patients’ choice to opt for one of both health care providers. Methods: We gathered patient level data between May and December 2012 in Flanders (Belgium) from three emergency departments and three general practices cooperatives. Chi square analyses were used in order to study the bivariate relationship between opting for a health care facility (ED or GPC) and various socio-economic factors. To determine the independent association, a logistic regression analysis was conducted. Results: Self-referral to the ED is significantly associated with: being male, being younger, being less educated, having a (lower educated) partner and living in a rural area. Conclusion: The results of this study show that opting for the ED during the out-of-hours is, in general, related to a lower socio-economic status. Therefore the government should focus on patients with a lower socio-economic status when disseminating information on the organisation of health care with an emphasis on the accessibility of the primary health care during out-of-hours. To meet the needs for health care during these out-of-hours, a possible solution could be an integrated facility of GPC and ED with one access to medical care for all patients.