Assessment of population satisfaction with the quality of general medical practice in the subject of the Russian Federation: pilot investigation

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Introduction. Patient satisfaction is one of the most important indicators of the quality of the health care noted in the priority objectives of state policy this area.

The aim of the study was to assess satisfaction with the quality of medical care provided by a general practitioner (GP), using the example of the activities of the Stupino Regional Clinical Hospital of the Moscow Region.

Materials and methods. The international EUROPEP questionnaire was used. Statistical processing of the study materials was performed using Statistica 10 and SAS JMP 11.

Results. Respondents highly evaluated the provision of medical care 17,87 ± 3,05 (17,04; 18,70, p = 0,05). High scores were obtained for the block «accessibility» of medical services, amounting to 21.76 ± 2.53 (21.07; 22.45, p = 0.05). Strong positive relationships «patient-GP» interactions (r = 0.9; p < 0.0001), joint decision making, and establishing trusting relationships (r = 0.73; p < 0.0001) were found. The level of trust relationship between patients and GPs was 18.94 ± 4.37 (17.75; 20.14, p = 0.05) and rated high. Problem areas were identified for individual issues in the management of medical care and recommendations for their adjustment were developed.

Limitations. The research is limited due to a small sample due to the testing of the EUROPEP questionnaire and its adaptation for the Russian health care system.

Conclusion. On the example of EUROPEP questionnaire on the base of the the Stupino regional clinical hospital of Moscow region there were obtained high estimates of satisfaction with the quality of medical care, provided by GPs/FDs. The revealed problems in achieving the expected medical results refer to the making of joint decisions and are limited by the interpretation of confidentiality in GP-patient interaction. The applied survey procedure confirms the necessity of wide implementation of the adapted EUROPEP questionnaire in the management of the quality of medical care and for taking corrective measures at the regional level.

Compliance with ethical standards. The written consent of the participant to conduct the survey and to process the information obtained was obtained prior to the start of the survey. The studies were approved by the decision of the local ethics committee (Protocol No. 1 of 12.02.2021).

Contribution of the authors:
Kuznetsova M.A. — concept and design of the study, collection and statistical processing material, text writing;
Vasilyeva T.P. — editing;
Gorenkov R.V. — material systematization, literary review.
All authors are responsible for the integrity of all parts of the manuscript and approval of the manuscript final version.

Acknowledgment. The study had no sponsorship.

Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Received: April 17, 2022
Accepted: June 22, 2022
Published: July 06, 2023

About the authors

Maria A. Kuznetsova

N.A. Semashko National Research Institute of Public Health

Author for correspondence.
Email: mascha.kuznetsova@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8243-5902

Postgraduate student, junior researcher of N.A. Semashko National Research Institute of Public Health, Moscow, 105064, Russian Federation.

e-mail: mascha.kuznetsova@yandex.ru

Russian Federation

Tatyana P. Vasilyeva

N.A. Semashko National Research Institute of Public Health

Email: noemail@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4831-1783
Russian Federation

Roman V. Gorenkov

N.A. Semashko National Research Institute of Public Health

Email: noemail@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3483-7928
Russian Federation

References

  1. WHO. Astana declaration on primary health care: from Alma-Ata towards universal health coverage and sustainable development goals. Astana; 2018. Available at: https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/primary-health/declaration/gcphc-declaration.pdf
  2. WHO. EUR/RC65/Inf.Doc./5 Global Strategy on Integrated, People-centred Health Services. In: Global Strategy on Human Resources for Health: Workforce 2030. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241511131
  3. Kapitonov V.F. The seeking medical attention in the urban adult population prior and during the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). Zdravookhranenie Rossiyskoy Federatsii. 2021; 65(6): 522–6. https://doi.org/10.47470/0044-197X-2021-65-6-522-526 https://elibrary.ru/snqont (in Russian)
  4. Shkarin V.V., Ivasheva V.V., Emel’yanova O.S., D’yachenko T.S. Actual issues of staffing of primary health care by district paediatrician on the example of the region of the Zdravookhranenie Rossiyskoy Federatsii. 2021; 65(6): 533–9. https://doi.org/10.47470/0044-197X-2021-65-6-533-539 https://elibrary.ru/ezjgrj (in Russian)
  5. Polyakova O.B., Bonkalo T.I. The specificity of the vitality of health care workers with professional deformations. Zdravookhranenie Rossiyskoy Federatsii. 2022; 66(1): 67–75. https://doi.org/10.46563/0044-197X-2022-66-1-67-75 https://elibrary.ru/rakjvk (in Russian)
  6. Sparkes S.P., Atun R., Bӓrnighausen T. The impact of the Family Medicine Model on patient satisfaction in Turkey: Panel analysis with province fixed effects. PLoS One. 2019; 14(1): e0210563. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210563
  7. Mahlknecht A., Abuzahra M.E., Piccoliori G., Engl A., Sönnichsen A. Are quality promotion initiatives in Austrian and Italian general practices associated with higher patient satisfaction and quality of life? Results from the interventional study ‘IQuaB’. Health Soc. Care Community. 2022; 30(2): e397-e409. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.13212
  8. Dzhusupov K.O., Toygonbaeva V.S., Aydaraliev A.A., Kudaybergenova T.A., Akkerman Dzh., Ayzinger T., et al. A group of family doctors: successes, problems and prospects. Zdravookhranenie Kirgizstana. 2002; (1): 26–32. (in Russian)
  9. Gillan U., Makkuiston R., Slevin O. Progress in the development of general practice / family medicine in the city of Saint Petersburg (Russian Federation). Rossiyskiy semeynyy vrach. 2019; 23(4): 19–31. https://doi.org/10.17816/RFD18921 https://elibrary.ru/mjgfud (in Russian)
  10. Bohle L.F., Valencia E., Ross G., Dzhabarovna D.D., Yarbaeva S.N., Kasymova Z.A., et al. Medical education reform in Tajikistan: comparison of the conventional one-year family medicine residency program and the new two-year residency program for postgraduate medical education. BMC Med. Educ. 2021; 21(1): 306. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02749-x
  11. Schäfer W.L.A., Boerma W.G.W., van den Berg M.J., De Maeseneer J., De Rosis S., Detollenaere J., et al. Are people’s health care needs better met when primary care is strong? A synthesis of the results of the QUALICOPC study in 34 countries. Prim. Health Care Res. Dev. 2019; 20: e104. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1463423619000434
  12. Sánchez-Sagrado T. Primary care in Italy. Semergen. 2019; 44(1): 50–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semerg.2017.03.009
  13. Vova-Chatzi C., Symvoulakis E., Parpoula C., Sbarouni V., Lionis C. Robustness of the EUROPEP questionnaire as regards data quality, reliability, and construct validity: The Greek experience before and after the economic crisis. Health Policy. 2020; 124(8): 856–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.05.021
  14. Odrinskiy V.A. Patient evaluation of general practitioners as a tool to improve the quality of primary health care. Rossiyskiy mediko-biologicheskiy vestnik imeni akademika I.P. Pavlova. 2014; 22(4): 68–73. https://elibrary.ru/tilood (in Russian)
  15. Dağdeviren N., Akturk Z. An evaluation of patient satisfaction in Turkey with the EUROPEP instrument. Yonsei Med. J. 2004; 45(1): 23–8. https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2004.45.1.23
  16. Petek D., Künzi B., Kersnik J., Szecsenyi J., Wensing M. Patients’ evaluations of European general practice-revisited after 11 years. Int. J. Qual. Health Care. 2011; 23(6): 621–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzr052
  17. Kersnik J. An evaluation of patient satisfaction with family practice care in Slovenia. Int. J. Qual. Health Care. 2000; 12(2): 143–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/12.2.143
  18. Wensing M., Mainz J., Grol R. A standardised instrument for patient evaluations of general practice care in Europe. Eur. J. Gen. Pract. 2000; 6(3): 82–7. https://doi.org/10.3109/13814780009069953
  19. Ali N.S., Khuwaja A.K., Kausar S., Nanji K. Patients’ evaluations of family practice care and attributes of a good family physician. Qual. Prim. Care. 2012; 20(5): 375–83.
  20. Klingenberg A., Bahrs O., Szecsenyi J. How do patients evaluate general practice? German results from the European Project on Patient Evaluation of General Practice Care (EUROPEP). Z. Arztl. Fortbild. Qualitatssich. 1999; 93(6): 437–45. (in German)
  21. Dimova R., Stoyanova R., Keskinova D. The EUROPEP questionnaire for patient’s evaluation of general practice care: Bulgarian experience. Croat. Med. J. 2017; 58(1): 63–74. https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2017.58.63
  22. Sheiman I., Shevsky V. Concentration of health care providers: does it contribute to integration of service delivery? Risk Manag. Healthc. Policy. 2019; 12: 153–66. https://doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S205905
  23. Petersen J., Kontsevaya A., McKee M., Richardson E., Cook S., Malyutina S., et al. Primary care use and cardiovascular disease risk in Russian 40-69 year olds: a cross-sectional study. J. Epidemiol. Community Health. 2020; 74(9): 692–967. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2019-213549 (in Russian)

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2023 Kuznetsova M.A., Vasilyeva T.P., Gorenkov R.V.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ:  ПИ № ФС77-50668 от 13.07.2012 г.