Assessing capacities and resilience of health services during the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learned from use of rapid key informant surveys.

This article is part of the Research Topic: 'Health Systems Recovery in the Context of COVID-19 and Protracted Conflict.' Problem: Many countries lacked rapid and nimble data systems to track health service capacities to respond to COVID-19. They struggled to assess and monitor rapidly evolving service disruptions, health workforce capacities, health products availability, community needs and perspectives, and mitigation responses to maintain essential health services. Method: Building on established methodologies, the World Health Organization developed a suite of methods and tools to support countries to rapidly fill data gaps and guide decision-making during COVID-19. The tools included: (1) a national "pulse" survey on service disruptions and bottlenecks; (2) a phone-based facility survey on frontline service capacities; and (3) a phone-based community survey on demand-side challenges and health needs. Use: Three national pulse surveys revealed persisting service disruptions throughout 2020-2021 (97 countries responded to all three rounds). Results guided mitigation strategies and operational plans at country level, and informed investments and delivery of essential supplies at global level. Facility and community surveys in 22 countries found similar disruptions and limited frontline service capacities at a more granular level. Findings informed key actions to improve service delivery and responsiveness from local to national levels. Lessons learned: The rapid key informant surveys provided a low-resource way to collect action-oriented health services data to inform response and recovery from local to global levels. The approach fostered country ownership, stronger data capacities, and integration into operational planning. The surveys are being evaluated to inform integration into country data systems to bolster routine health services monitoring and serve as health services alert functions for the future.

Patients' perceptions of health system responsiveness in ambulatory care in Germany.

OBJECTIVE: To identify overall levels of health system responsiveness and the associations with social determinants for ambulatory health care in Germany from a user perspective. METHODS: This analysis drew on a 2016 health survey sample of 6113 adults in Germany. Responsiveness was measured for general practitioners (GPs) and specialists (SPs) along the domains trust, dignity, confidentiality, autonomy and communication. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression techniques were applied. RESULTS: Over 90% of all patients assessed their last GP and SP visit as good regarding trust, dignity, autonomy and communication, but only half for confidentiality in the doctor office (GP visits: 50.3%; SP visits: 52.4%). For GP visits, patients' young age of 18-34 years showed most associations with poor assessment of the domains, for SP visits a current health problem as the reason for the last consultation. CONCLUSION: While overall responsiveness levels for ambulatory care are high, ratings of confidentiality are distressing. Particularly patients' young age and bad health are associated with a poor assessment of responsiveness. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Measures to improve doctor office infrastructure and to enhance responsiveness towards patients under the age of 35 years and those with health problems are vital to increase responsiveness.

[Sociodemographic and health-related determinants of health care utilisation and access to primary and specialist care: Results of a nationwide population survey in Germany (2006-2016)]. / Soziodemografische und gesundheitsbezogene Merkmale der Inanspruchnahme und des Zugangs zu haus- und fachärztlicher Versorgung ­ Ergebnisse einer deutschlandweiten Bevölkerungsbefragung von 2006 bis 2016.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this paper is to identify systematic differences due to sociodemographic and health-related determinants in outpatient healthcare utilisation and access in Germany for the period from 2006 to 2016. The study focuses on frequent users and those reporting particularly long wait times for their physician appointments, and it contributes to assessing the level of health equity in Germany. METHODS: The investigation draws on nine population surveys conducted by the German National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (NASHIP), which interviewed 42,925 respondents aged 18 and above. "Frequent users" were operationalised as those respondents who reported more than ten consultations with outpatient general practitioners (GPs) and specialists (SPs) in the preceding twelve months. Respondents who experienced wait times of more than one month for their last doctor appointment were categorised as "very long wait times". Sociodemographic determinants included age, gender, educational and occupational status, population and region of place of residence, as well as type of health insurance of the respondents. Health-related factors were self-assessed health status and reason for last medical consultation. Statistical analyses were conducted using bivariate and multivariate techniques (logistic regression). RESULTS: Utilisation: Frequent users of GPs and SPs are predominantly respondents in poor health, retirees and younger persons (18 to 34 years of age). Furthermore, people with a lower educational background consult their GPs significantly more often than people with higher levels of education. Also, patients with statutory health insurance coverage visit GPs more frequently than those having private health insurance, whereas the opposite holds true for SP consultations. Access: Very long wait times for GP and SP appointments were most often experienced by respondents who consult GPs and SPs for preventive medical check-ups or health screenings, have statutory health insurance, live in eastern Germany and who are above 60 years of age. In addition, people with higher levels of education are significantly more likely to experience wait times for SP appointments of more than one month than people with a lower educational background. The proportion of frequent users as well as of those reporting very long wait times for SP appointments has increased in Germany over the period examined. CONCLUSION: This study reveals that a high frequency of GP and SP consultations is primarily associated with self-assessed poor health, indicating that prioritisation is based on clinical need. In order to ensure the same needs-based prioritisation in the access to outpatient healthcare, regulatory measures are required to decrease wait times of more than one month for SP appointments, with a special focus on people with statutory health insurance coverage, residents of eastern Germany and the elderly.