תוצאת חיפוש

What Primary Care Physicians Think of Israel's Health Policy Reform

Revital Gross, Hava Tabenkin, Shuli Brammli-Greenberg

JDC Brookdale Institute, Jerusalem, HaEmek Hospital, Afula; and Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheba

Opinions of the National Health Insurance (NHI) Law held by primary care physicians were surveyed. A questionnaire was submitted (April-July 1997) to 930 primary care physicians employed by sick funds, including general practitioners, family physicians, pediatricians and internists. Response rate was 86%.

They supported the main components of the NHI law. It was considered desirable "to a great" or "very great extent" to allocate funds to sick funds based on age and number of members (76%), to require them to accept all applicants (72%), to designate a uniform basket of services (65%), to allow members to transfer freely between funds (63%), and to allow sick funds to sell supplemental insurance (59%). However, only 41% were satisfied with the implementation of the law.

Multivariate analysis showed that employment by Maccabi, Meuhedet, or Leumit sick funds had an independent effect on low satisfaction with the law as implemented, and on negative opinions about the uniform basket of services, the accepting of all applicants, and allocation of funding based on age and number of members. Those employed by the Maccabi and Meuhedet funds were in favor of allowing sick funds to sell supplemental insurance.

The findings of the study have implications for policy-makers interested in increasing support for national health reform by physicians. It is important to examine possibilities of developing direct channels of communication between national policy-makers and physicians, as well as institutionalizing mechanisms that involve physicians directly in formulation of national policy.

Patients' Opinions of the Role of Primary Care Physicians and the Organization of Health Care Services

Revital Gross, Hava Tabenkin, Shuli Bramli, Pesach Schvartzman

JDC-Brookdale Institute, Jerusalem; Dept. of Family Medicine, HaEmek Hospital, Afula; Kupat Holim Clalit, Northern District; Institute for Specialization, Ben-Gurion University, Northern Branch; and Dept. of Family Medicine, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev and Kupat Holim Clalit, Beer Sheba

Patients' opinions of the role of the primary care physician were studied. The study population consisted of Hebrew-speaking members of the Clalit Sick Fund, aged 18+, who visited primary care and specialty clinics. Interviews took place during January-March 1995 in the Emek and Jerusalem, and during August-October 1995 in Beer Sheba. A total of 2,734 interviews were conducted, and the response rate was 88%. 64% of the respondents preferred the primary care physician as the first address for most problems occurring during the day. Multivariate analysis revealed that the variables predicting this preference were: being over age 45, having completed less than 12 years of schooling, being satisfied with the physician, and when a child's illness was involved. Whether the physician was a specialist had only a marginal effect. The findings also show that among those who did go directly to a specialist for the current visit, 49% would still prefer the primary care physician to be the first address for most problems. However, half of the respondents initiated the current visit to the specialty clinic themselves. The findings also showed that a preference for the primary care physician to be the first address had an independent and statistically significant effect on the following aspects of service consumption: taking the initiative to go to a specialist, the intention to return to the primary care physician or to the specialist for continuing care, and the patient's belief that referral to a specialist was needed. The findings of the study may be of assistance to policy-makers on the national level and to sick funds in planning the role of the primary care physician, so that it corresponds, on the one hand, to the needs of the sick funds and the economic constraints in the health system, and on the other, to the preferences of the patient.