Next Article in Journal
Why Do Patients Move from Online Health Platforms to Hospitals? The Perspectives of Fairness Theory and Brand Extension Theory
Next Article in Special Issue
Experience of Good Practice in an Occupational Accident Mutual Insurance Society, Based on the Voice of Patients and Professionals
Previous Article in Journal
Contamination by Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria in Selected Environments in Thailand
Previous Article in Special Issue
Promoting OPD Patient Satisfaction through Different Healthcare Determinants: A Study of Public Sector Hospitals
Open AccessArticle

Patient Input in Regional Healthcare Planning—A Meaningful Contribution

University Hospital Tübingen, Institute for General Practice and Interprofessional Care, Osianderstraße 5, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(19), 3754; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16193754
Received: 31 August 2019 / Revised: 26 September 2019 / Accepted: 1 October 2019 / Published: 5 October 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Patient Satisfaction with Health Services)
Background: There are well-known methodological and analytical challenges in planning regional healthcare services (HCS). Increasingly, the need for data-derived planning, including user-perspectives, is discussed. This study aims to better understand the possible contribution of citizen experience in the assessment of regional HCS needs in two regions of Germany. Methods: We conducted a written survey in two regions of differing size—a community (3653 inhabitants) and a county (165,211 inhabitants). Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess the impact of sociodemographic and regional factors on the assessment of HCS provided by general practitioners (GPs) and specialists. Results: Except for age and financial resources available for one’s own health, populations did not differ significantly between the regions. However, citizens’ perception of HCS (measured by satisfaction with 1 = very good to 5 = very poor) differed clearly between different services (e.g., specialists: 3.8–4.3 and pharmacies: 1.7–2.5) as well as between regions (GPs: 1.7–3.1; therapists: 2.9–4). In the multivariate model, region (next to income and age) was a consistent predictor of the perception of GP- and specialist-provided care. Discussion: Citizens’ perceptions of HCS correspond to regional provider density (the greater the density, the better the perception) and add insights into citizens’ needs. Therefore, they can provide valuable information on regional HCS strengths and weaknesses and are a valid resource to support decision makers in shaping regional care structures. View Full-Text
Keywords: healthcare planning; regional disparities; primary care; patient satisfaction; citizens’ perception; community; health services research; questionnaires; patient needs healthcare planning; regional disparities; primary care; patient satisfaction; citizens’ perception; community; health services research; questionnaires; patient needs
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Sturm, H.; Colombo, M.; Hebeiss, T.; Joos, S.; Koch, R. Patient Input in Regional Healthcare Planning—A Meaningful Contribution. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3754.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop