Primary care indicators for disease burden, monitoring and surveillance of COVID-19 in 31 European countries: Eurodata Study.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority of patients received ambulatory treatment, highlighting the importance of primary health care (PHC). However, there is limited knowledge regarding PHC workload in Europe during this period. The utilization of COVID-19 PHC indicators could facilitate the efficient monitoring and coordination of the pandemic response. The objective of this study is to describe PHC indicators for disease surveillance and monitoring of COVID-19's impact in Europe. METHODS: Descriptive, cross-sectional study employing data obtained through a semi-structured ad hoc questionnaire, which was collectively agreed upon by all participants. The study encompasses PHC settings in 31 European countries from March 2020 to August 2021. Key-informants from each country answered the questionnaire. Main outcome: the identification of any indicator used to describe PHC COVID-19 activity. RESULTS: Out of the 31 countries surveyed, data on PHC information were obtained from 14. The principal indicators were: total number of cases within PHC (Belarus, Cyprus, Italy, Romania and Spain), number of follow-up cases (Croatia, Cyprus, Finland, Spain and Turkey), GP's COVID-19 tests referrals (Poland), proportion of COVID-19 cases among respiratory illnesses consultations (Norway and France), sick leaves issued by GPs (Romania and Spain) and examination and complementary tests (Cyprus). All COVID-19 cases were attended in PHC in Belarus and Italy. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic exposes a crucial deficiency in preparedness for infectious diseases in European health systems highlighting the inconsistent recording of indicators within PHC organizations. PHC standardized indicators and public data accessibility are urgently needed, conforming the foundation for an effective European-level health services response framework against future pandemics.

Challenges facing mental health systems arising from the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from 14 European and North American countries.

We assessed challenges that the COVID-19 pandemic presented for mental health systems and the responses to these challenges in 14 countries in Europe and North America. Experts from each country filled out a structured questionnaire with closed- and open-ended questions between January and June 2021. We conducted thematic analysis to investigate the qualitative responses to open-ended questions, and we summarized the responses to closed-ended survey items on changes in telemental health policies and regulations. Findings revealed that many countries grappled with the rising demand for mental health services against a backdrop of mental health provider shortages and challenges responding to workforce stress and burnout. All countries in our sample implemented new policies or initiatives to strengthen mental health service delivery - with more than two-thirds investing to bolster their specialized mental health care sector. There was a universal shift to telehealth to deliver a larger portion of mental health services in all 14 countries, which was facilitated by changes in national regulations and policies; 11 of the 14 participating countries relaxed regulations and 10 of 14 countries made changes to reimbursement policies to facilitate telemental health care. These findings provide a first step to assess the long-term challenges and re-organizational effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health systems in Europe and North America.

Exploring variation of coverage and access to dental care for adults in 11 European countries: a vignette approach.

BACKGROUND: Oral health, coupled with rising awareness on the impact that limited dental care coverage has on oral health and general health and well-being, has received increased attention over the past few years. The purpose of the study was to compare the statutory coverage and access to dental care for adult services in 11 European countries using a vignette approach. METHODS: We used three patient vignettes to highlight the differences of the dimensions of coverage and access to dental care (coverage, cost-sharing and accessibility). The three vignettes describe typical care pathways for patients with the most common oral health conditions (caries, periodontal disease, edentulism). The vignettes were completed by health services researchers knowledgeable on dental care, dentists, or teams consisting of a health systems expert working together with dental specialists. RESULTS: Completed vignettes were received from 11 countries: Bulgaria, Estonia, France, Germany, Republic of Ireland (Ireland), Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia and Sweden. While emergency dental care, tooth extraction and restorative care for acute pain due to carious lesions are covered in most responding countries, root canal treatment, periodontal care and prosthetic restoration often require cost-sharing or are entirely excluded from the benefit basket. Regular dental visits are also limited to one visit per year in many countries. Beyond financial barriers due to out-of-pocket payments, patients may experience very different physical barriers to accessing dental care. The limited availability of contracted dentists (especially in rural areas) and the unequal distribution and lack of specialised dentists are major access barriers to public dental care. CONCLUSIONS: According to the results, statutory coverage of dental care varies across European countries, while access barriers are largely similar. Many dental services require substantial cost-sharing in most countries, leading to high out-of-pocket spending. Socioeconomic status is thus a main determinant for access to dental care, but other factors such as geography, age and comorbidities can also inhibit access and affect outcomes. Moreover, coverage in most oral health systems is targeted at treatment and less at preventative oral health care.

Mapping variability in allocation of Long-Term Care funds across payer agencies in OECD countries.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term care (LTC) is organized in a fragmented manner. Payer agencies (PA) receive LTC funds from the agency collecting funds, and commission services. Yet, distributional equity (DE) across PAs, a precondition to geographical equity of access to LTC, has received limited attention. We conceptualize that LTC systems promote DE when they are designed to set eligibility criteria nationally (vs. locally); and to distribute funds among PAs based on needs-formula (vs. past-budgets or government decisions). OBJECTIVES: This cross-country study highlights to what extent different LTC systems are designed to promote DE across PAs, and the parameters used in allocation formulae. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected through a questionnaire filled by experts from 17 OECD countries. RESULTS: 11 out of 25 LTC systems analyzed, fully meet DE as we defined. 5 systems which give high autonomy to PAs have designs with low levels of DE; while nine systems partially promote DE. Allocation formulae vary in their complexity as some systems use simple demographic parameters while others apply socio-economic status, disability, and LTC cost variations. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: A minority of LTC systems fully meet DE, which is only one of the criteria in allocation of LTC resources. Some systems prefer local priority-setting and governance over DE. Countries that value DE should harmonize the eligibility criteria at the national level and allocate funds according to needs across regions.

Barriers to accessing adequate maternal care in Latvia: A mixed-method study among women, providers and decision-makers.

INTRODUCTION: Latvia has a high maternal mortality ratio compared to other European countries, as well as major inequities in accessing adequate maternal care. Adequacy refers to the extent to which services are safe, effective, timely, efficient, equitable and people-centred. This study aims to explore stakeholder views on access to adequate maternal care in Latvia and the extent to which there was consensus. METHODS: This mixed-method study is based on an online survey among women who recently gave birth, as well as interviews with healthcare providers and decision-makers. The data were analysed using the method of directed qualitative content analysis. The extent of stakeholder consensus was determined by studying five access-related aspects of maternal care: availability, adequacy, affordability, approachability and acceptability. FINDINGS: Our study identified barriers to accessing adequate maternal care related to availability (i.e. shortage of human resources, geographical distance) and appropriateness (i.e. inequalities in provider knowledge, care provision and use of clinical guidelines). Other challenges were related to providers' approaches towards women (i.e. communication) and, to a lesser extent, maternal care acceptance by women (i.e. health literacy). CONCLUSIONS: The barriers identified in our study highlight areas that should be addressed in future reforms of maternal care. These barriers also indicate the need for micro-level indicators that can facilitate a comprehensive evaluation of maternal care in Latvia and elsewhere.

Re-thinking performance assessment for primary care: Opinion of the expert panel on effective ways of investing in health.

BACKGROUND: In 2017, the European Commission (EC) identified as a policy priority the performance assessment of primary care systems, which relates to a country's primary care structure, services delivery and outcomes. The EC requested its Expert Panel on Effective Ways of Investing in Health (Expert Panel) to provide an opinion on ways for improving performance assessment of primary care. OBJECTIVES: To provide an overview of domains and dimensions to be taken into consideration in assessing primary care and specific indicators to be collected and analysed to improve understanding of primary care performance. METHODS: A sub-group of the Expert Panel performed a literature review. The opinion was drafted, improved and approved through working-group discussions, consultations with the EC, the Expert Group on Health Systems Performance Assessment, and a public hearing. RESULTS: Drawing on the main characteristics of primary care, we propose essential elements of a primary care performance assessment system based on specific indicators. We identified ten domains with accompanying dimensions for which comparative key indicators and descriptive indicators are proposed: (1) universal and accessible care, (2) integrated, (3) person-centred, (4) comprehensive and community-oriented care, (5) provided by a team accountable for addressing a vast majority of personal health needs, (6) sustained partnership with patients and informal caregivers, (7) coordination, (8) continuity of care, (9) primary care organization, and (10) human resources. CONCLUSION: The identified characteristics and criteria for development of a primary care performance assessment system provides a starting point for strengthening the coherence of assessment frameworks across countries and exchanging best practices.

The role of the European Structural and Investment Funds in Financing Health System in Lithuania: Experience from 2007 to 2013 funding period and implications for the future.

European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) are a major source of investments in the newer EU member states. In Lithuania's health sector, the amount for the 2007-2013 funding period reached more than €400 million. In this paper we aim to (i) identify the key areas in the health sector which were supported by ESIF, (ii) determine the extent to which ESIF assisted the implementation of the ongoing health system reform; and (iii) assess whether the use of funds has led to expected improvements in healthcare. We review the national strategic documents and legislation, and perform calculations to determine funding allocations by specific area, based on the available data. We analyse changes according to a set of selected indicators. We find that implementation of programmes funded by the ESIF lacks formal evaluation. Existing evidence suggests that some improvement has been achieved by 2013. However, there are persisting challenges, including failure to reach a broad agreement on selection of health and healthcare indicators, lack of transparency in allocations, and absence of coherent assessment measures of healthcare quality and accessibility.

Prevalence and correlates of young people's sexual aggression perpetration and victimisation in 10 European countries: a multi-level analysis.

Data are presented on young people's sexual victimisation and perpetration from 10 European countries (Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Greece, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia and Spain) using a shared measurement tool (N = 3480 participants, aged between 18 and 27 years). Between 19.7 and 52.2% of female and between 10.1 and 55.8% of male respondents reported having experienced at least one incident of sexual victimisation since the age of consent. In two countries, victimisation rates were significantly higher for men than for women. Between 5.5 and 48.7% of male and 2.6 and 14.8% of female participants reported having engaged in a least one act of sexual aggression perpetration, with higher rates for men than for women in all countries. Victimisation rates correlated negatively with sexual assertiveness and positively with alcohol use in sexual encounters. Perpetration rates correlated positively with attitudes condoning physical dating violence and with alcohol use in men, and negatively with sexual assertiveness in women. At the country level, lower gender equality in economic power and in the work domain was related to higher male perpetration rates. Lower gender equality in political power and higher sexual assertiveness in women relative to men were linked to higher male victimisation rates.

Lithuania: health system review.

This analysis of the Lithuanian health system reviews the developments in organization and governance, health financing, health-care provision, health reforms and health system performance since 2000.The Lithuanian health system is a mixed system, predominantly funded from the National Health Insurance Fund through a compulsory health insurance scheme, supplemented by substantial state contributions on behalf of the economically inactive population amounting to about half of its budget. Public financing of the health sector has gradually increased since 2004 to 5.2 per cent of GDP in 2010.Although the Lithuanian health system was tested by the recent economic crisis, Lithuanias counter-cyclical state health insurance contribution policies (ensuring coverage for the economically inactive population) helped the health system to weather the crisis, and Lithuania successfully used the crisis as a lever to reduce the prices of medicines.Yet the future impact of cuts in public health spending is a cause for concern. In addition, out-of-pocket payments remain high (in particular for pharmaceuticals) and could threaten health access for vulnerable groups.A number of challenges remain. The primary care system needs strengthening so that more patients are treated instead of being referred to a specialist, which will also require a change in attitude by patients. Transparency and accountability need to be increased in resource allocation, including financing of capital investment and in the payer provider relationship. Finally, population health,albeit improving, remains a concern, and major progress can be achieved by reducing the burden of amenable and preventable mortality.

Lithuania: health system review

This analysis of the Lithuanian health system reviews the developmentsin organization and governance, health financing, health care provision,health reforms and health system performance since 2000. TheLithuanian health system is a mixed system, predominantly funded from theNational Health Insurance Fund through a compulsory health insurance scheme,supplemented by substantial state contributions on behalf of the economicallyinactive population amounting to about half of its budget. Public financingof the health sector has gradually increased since 2004 to 5.2% of GDP in2010. Although the Lithuanian health system was tested by the recent economiccrisis, Lithuania’s counter-cyclical state health insurance contribution policies(ensuring coverage for the economically inactive population) helped the healthsystem to weather the crisis, and Lithuania successfully used the crisis as alever to reduce the prices of medicines. Yet the future impact of cuts in publichealth spending is a cause for concern. In addition, out-of-pocket paymentsremain high (in particular for pharmaceuticals) and could threaten healthaccess for vulnerable groups. A number of challenges remain. The primarycare system needs strengthening so that more patients are treated instead ofbeing referred to a specialist, which will also require a change in attitude bypatients. Transparency and accountability need to be increased in resourceallocation, including financing of capital investment and in the payer–providerrelationship. Finally, population health, albeit improving, remains a concern,and major progress can be achieved by reducing the burden of amenable andpreventable mortality.