A comparison of social prescribing approaches across twelve high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Social prescribing connects patients with community resources to improve their health and well-being. It is gaining momentum globally due to its potential for addressing non-medical causes of illness while building on existing resources and enhancing overall health at a relatively low cost. The COVID-19 pandemic further underscored the need for policy interventions to address health-related social issues such as loneliness and isolation. AIM: This paper presents evidence of the conceptualisation and implementation of social prescribing schemes in twelve countries: Australia, Austria, Canada, England, Finland, Germany, Portugal, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, the Netherlands, the United States and Wales. METHODS: Twelve countries were identified through the Health Systems and Policy Monitor (HSPM) network and the EuroHealthNet Partnership. Information was collected through a twelve open-ended question survey based on a conceptual model inspired by the WHO's Health System Framework. RESULTS: We found that social prescribing can take different forms, and the scale of implementation also varies significantly. Robust evidence on impact is scarce and highly context-specific, with some indications of cost-effectiveness and positive impact on well-being. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides insights into social prescribing in various contexts and may guide countries interested in holistically tackling health-related social factors and strengthening community-based care. Policies can support a more seamless integration of social prescribing into existing care, improve collaboration among sectors and training programs for health and social care professionals.

How is enrollees' trust in health insurers associated with choosing health insurance?

In a healthcare system based on managed competition, health insurers are intended to be the prudent buyers of care on behalf of their enrollees. Equally, citizens are expected to be critical consumers when choosing a health insurance policy. The choice of a health insurance policy may be related to trust in the health insurer, as enrollees must believe that the health insurer will make the right choices for them when it comes to purchasing care. This study aims to investigate how enrollees' trust in health insurers is associated with their choice of a health insurance policy in the Netherlands. We will focus on the switching behaviour of enrollees and the choice of a policy with restrictive conditions. In February 2022, a questionnaire was sent to a representative sample regarding gender and age of the adult Dutch population. In total 1,125 enrollees responded, a response rate of 56%. Respondents were asked about the choices they made in choosing health insurance. Trust in health insurers was measured using the Health Insurer Trust Scale (HITS), a validated multiple item scale. Descriptive statistics, a paired t-test and logistic regression models were conducted to analyse the results. Of all respondents, 35% indicated that they agree, or completely agree, with the statement that they trust health insurers completely. In addition, trust in enrollees' own insurer is slightly higher than trust in other insurers (36.29 vs. 33.59, p<0.001). Furthermore, we found no significant associations between trust in health insurers, and whether enrollees have either switched health insurers or have chosen a policy with restrictive conditions. This study showed that enrollees' trust in health insurance in the Netherlands is relatively low and that trust in their own insurer is slightly higher than trust in other insurers. Furthermore, this study does not show a relationship between trust in health insurers and, either switching health insurers, or choosing a policy with restrictive conditions. Nevertheless, attention for increasing the trust in health insurers might still be important, as low trust may have negative consequences for other elements of the functioning of the healthcare system.

Social context matters: The role of social support and social norms in support for solidarity in healthcare financing.

In many European countries, including the Netherlands, the healthcare system is financed according to the principles of solidarity. It is important, therefore, that public support for solidarity in healthcare financing is sufficient in order to ensure that people remain willing to contribute towards solidarity-based systems. The high willingness to contribute to the healthcare costs of others in the Netherlands suggests that support is generally high. However, there are differences between groups. Previous research has focused on mechanisms at the individual and institutional level to explain these differences. However, people's social context may also play a role. Little research has been conducted into this. To fill this gap, we examined the role of perceived social support and social norms in order to explain differences in the willingness to contribute to other people's healthcare costs. In November 2021, we conducted a survey study in which a questionnaire was sent to a representative sample of 1,500 members of the Dutch Healthcare Consumer Panel. This was returned by 837 panel members (56% response rate). Using logistic regression analysis, we showed that people who perceive higher levels of social support are more willing to contribute to the healthcare costs of others. We also found that the willingness to contribute is higher when someone's social context is more supportive of healthcare systems that are financed according to the principles of solidarity. This effect does not differ between people who perceive low and high levels of social support. Our results suggest that, next to the individual and institutional level, the social context of people has to be taken into consideration in policy and research addressing support for solidarity in healthcare financing.

Regional practice variation in induction of labor in the Netherlands: Does it matter? A multilevel analysis of the association between induction rates and perinatal and maternal outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Practice variation in healthcare is a complex issue. We focused on practice variation in induction of labor between maternity care networks in the Netherlands. These collaborations of hospitals and midwifery practices are jointly responsible for providing high-quality maternity care. We explored the association between induction rates and maternal and perinatal outcomes. METHODS: In a retrospective population-based cohort study, we included records of 184,422 women who had a singleton, vertex birth of their first child after a gestation of at least 37 weeks in the years 2016-2018. We calculated induction rates for each maternity care network. We divided networks in induction rate categories: lowest (Q1), moderate (Q2-3) and highest quartile (Q4). We explored the association of these categories with unplanned caesarean sections, unfavorable maternal outcomes and adverse perinatal outcomes using descriptive statistics and multilevel logistic regression analysis corrected for population characteristics. FINDINGS: The induction rate ranged from 14.3% to 41.1% (mean 24.4%, SD 5.3). Women in Q1 had fewer unplanned caesarean sections (Q1: 10.2%, Q2-3: 12.1%; Q4: 12.8%), less unfavorable maternal outcomes (Q1: 33.8%; Q2-3: 35.7%; Q4: 36.3%) and less adverse perinatal outcomes (Q1: 1.0%; Q2-3: 1.1%; Q4: 1.3%). The multilevel analysis showed a lower unplanned caesarean section rate in Q1 in comparison with reference category Q2-3 (OR 0.83; p = .009). The unplanned caesarean section rate in Q4 was similar to the reference category. No significant associations with unfavorable maternal or adverse perinatal outcomes were observed. CONCLUSION: Practice variation in labor induction is high in Dutch maternity care networks, with limited association with maternal outcomes and no association with perinatal outcomes. Networks with low induction rates had lower unplanned caesarean section rates compared to networks with moderate rates. Further in-depth research is necessary to understand the mechanisms that contribute to practice variation and the observed association with unplanned caesarean sections.

Has public support for solidarity in healthcare financing in the Netherlands changed over time? A repeated cross-sectional study.

It is argued that solidarity-based healthcare systems are under pressure and that public support is decreasing. It can, therefore, be expected that support for solidarity in healthcare financing has diminished over time. However, little research has been conducted into this. To fill this gap, we used survey data from 2013, 2015, 2017, 2019, and 2021 to examine changes in public support for solidarity in healthcare financing in the Netherlands over time. This was operationalised as the own willingness and the expected willingness of others to contribute to other people's healthcare costs. Using logistic regression analysis, we found that the own willingness to contribute has slightly increased among the general population over time, although this was not observed in all subgroups. No change in the expected willingness of others to contribute was observed. Our results suggest that the willingness to contribute to other people's healthcare costs has, at least, not decreased over time. A majority of the Dutch population remains willing to share the burden of healthcare costs, indicating support for the principles of the solidarity-based healthcare system. However, not all people are willing to contribute to the healthcare costs of others. In addition, we do not know how much people want to pay. Further research into these topics is necessary.

Preferred Conversation Topics with Respect to Treatment Decisions Among Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes.

Purpose: Greater knowledge of individuals' needs and preferences can enhance shared decision-making, which is associated with improved quality of decisions and increased satisfaction. This study aimed to identify and prioritize the attributes (ie conversation topics) that individuals with type 2 diabetes find it most important to discuss with their healthcare provider regarding treatment decisions. Patients and Methods: First, small group interviews were organized with adults with type 2 diabetes (N=8) treated in primary care to identify the attributes that they find important to discuss regarding treatment decisions. A five-step nominal group technique was applied during the interviews. An object best-worst scaling (BWS) survey was subsequently distributed to individuals with self-reported diabetes participating in the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel of the Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (N=600) to determine the relative importance score (RIS) of the identified attributes. A higher RIS indicates a higher level of perceived importance. Subgroup and latent class analyses were performed to explore whether individuals' demographic and disease characteristics influenced their attribute preferences. Results: A total of 21 attributes were identified during three small group interviews with individuals with type 2 diabetes. Respondents in the BWS survey (N=285) viewed "quality of life" (RIS=11.97), "clinical outcomes" (RIS=10.40), "long-term diabetes complications" (RIS=9.83) and "short-term adverse medication" (RIS=7.72) as the most important in the decision-making process for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Some differences in attribute preferences were identified according to demographic and disease characteristics. Conclusion: In general, individuals with type 2 diabetes not only want to discuss the biological effects of treatments, but also the impact of treatment on their quality of life. Healthcare providers should be aware that attributes are viewed differently by different individuals. This emphasizes the need for tailor-made healthcare decisions, which means eliciting and responding to individual preferences in the decision-making process.

The relation between trust and the willingness of enrollees to receive healthcare advice from their health insurer.

BACKGROUND: In a healthcare system based on managed competition, it is important that health insurers are able to channel enrollees to preferred providers. This results in incentives for healthcare providers to improve the quality and reduce the price of care. One of the instruments to guide enrollees to preferred providers is by providing healthcare advice. In order to use healthcare advice as an effective instrument, it is important that enrollees accept the health insurer as a healthcare advisor. As trust in health insurers is not high, this may be an obstacle for enrollees to be receptive to the health insurer's advice. This study aims to investigate the association between trust in the health insurer and the willingness to receive healthcare advice from the health insurer in the Netherlands. In terms of receiving healthcare advice, we examine both enrollees' willingness to approach the health insurer themselves and their willingness to be approached by the health insurer. METHODS: In February 2021, a questionnaire was sent to a representative sample of the Dutch population. The questionnaire was completed by 885 respondents (response rate 59%). Respondents were asked about their willingness to receive healthcare advice, and trust in the health insurer was measured using a validated multiple item scale. Logistic regression models were conducted to analyse the results. RESULTS: Enrollees with more trust in the health insurer were more willing to approach their health insurer for healthcare advice (OR = 1.07, p = 0.00). In addition, a higher level of trust in the health insurer is significantly associated with the odds that enrollees would like it/really appreciate it if their health insurer actively approached them with healthcare advice (OR = 1.07, p = 0.00). The role of trust in the willingness to receive healthcare advice is not proven to differ between groups with regard to educational levels, health status or age. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that trust plays a role in the willingness to receive healthcare advice from the health insurer. The association between the two emphasizes the importance to increase enrollees' trust in the health insurer. As a result, health insurers may be better able to fulfil their role as healthcare advisor.

Measures to improve patient needs assessments and reduce practice variation in Dutch home care organizations.

AIM: Worldwide, long-term care tends to shift from institutional care towards home care. In order to deliver high-quality and adequate care, the type, amount and cost of care is determined by a patient needs assessment. However, there are indications that this patient needs assessment varies between comparable patients. In the Netherlands, some home care organizations aim to improve patient needs assessments by implementing improvement measures to reduce this practice variation. The goal of this study was to explore the type and perceived impact of those implemented improvement measures. DESIGN: A cross-sectional explorative survey study was conducted among Dutch home care organizations between January and April 2021. METHODS: An online questionnaire with 26 items was developed by the research team, which was distributed through Dutch nationwide home care sector organizations, the Dutch nurses' association (V&VN) and the Dutch society for home care nursing (NWG). RESULTS: The survey was completed by 184 respondents, including home care nurses, managers and staff who are responsible for training, policy and quality of care. Intervision and peer review for home care nurses were the most common reported improvement measures that were implemented in home care organizations. The experiences of those improvement measures have been perceived as creating greater uniformity in the patient needs assessment, making home care nurses feel more supported and secure performing their patient needs assessment and that the provided care is more in line with patients' demand. Our findings give insights into type and perceived impact of improvement measures that Dutch home care organizations implemented. Further research is needed to find out whether improvement measures actually improve patient needs assessments and reduce practice variation.

Measuring health insurance literacy in the Netherlands - First results of the HILM-NL questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: There are several indications that citizens in the Netherlands struggle to make critical, well-considered decisions about which insurance policy best fits their needs and preferences. This can lead to citizens being sub-optimally insured, facing unexpected costs or suffering inadequate coverage. This study aims to examine how health insurance literacy (HIL) is distributed among citizens in the Netherlands; and to find out whether there are certain groups who have more difficulty choosing and using a health insurance policy. METHODS: We measured health insurance literacy using the HILM-NL questionnaire, the validated Dutch version of the original health insurance literacy measure (HILM). In February 2020, the HILM-NL was sent to 1,500 members of the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel. The response rate was 54% (806). RESULTS: There is a wide variation in HIL among citizens in the Netherlands. The average total HILM-NL score is 55.14 (on a range of 21-84). The level of education and the household net income are significantly related to HIL. CONCLUSIONS: Citizens who completed less education or earn a lower income are relatively more likely to have difficulty choosing a health insurance policy or using policy benefits to pay for health services once enrolled. It is important to support these vulnerable groups properly in their choice and use of a health insurance policy.

Associations between Demographics, Tinnitus Specific-, Audiological-, General- and Mental Health Factors, and the Impact of Tinnitus on Daily Life.

Our objective was to study associations between demographics, tinnitus specific-, audiological-, general- and mental health characteristics, and impact of tinnitus in the general population. In this cross-sectional survey study in the Dutch population, data were prospectively gathered. Tinnitus impact was assessed with the Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI). We included participants who experienced tinnitus and for whom a total TFI score could be calculated (n = 212). We performed univariable and multivariable regression analyses. Due to logarithmical transformation, the B-scores were back-transformed to show the actual difference in points on the TFI. People who considered hyperacusis a small problem had a 12.5-point higher TFI score, those who considered it a mediocre problem had a 17.6-point higher TFI score and those who considered it a large problem had a 24.1-point higher TFI score compared to people who did not consider hyperacusis a problem. People who indicated having minor hearing problems had a 10.5-point higher TFI score, those with mediocre hearing problems had a 20.4-point higher TFI score and those with severe hearing problems had a 41.6-point higher TFI score compared to people who did not have subjective hearing problems. In conclusion, audiological risk factors, such as hearing problems and hyperacusis, have the largest association with the impact of tinnitus on daily life, compared to other assessed variables. The results of this study can be used in future research to find targeted interventions to diminish the impact of tinnitus.

To what degree are health insurance enrollees in the Netherlands aware of the restrictive conditions attached to their policies?

BACKGROUND: Within the Dutch healthcare system of managed competition, health insurers can contract healthcare providers selectively. Enrollees who choose a health insurance policy with restrictive conditions will have to make a co-payment if they consult a non-contracted provider. This study aims to gain insight into enrollees' awareness of the conditions of such health insurance policies. METHODS: In August 2020, an online questionnaire was sent out via health insurers to their enrollees with restrictive health plans. In total 13,588 enrollees responded. RESULTS: One fifth of the respondents appeared to be totally unfamiliar with the policy conditions. Men, younger people, people with a low level of education, a lower income, a poorer health status and non-care users were found to be less familiar with the conditions. Of those who have been in the situation that they wanted to visit a healthcare provider whose care was not fully reimbursed, 62% went to that provider. Of those who had to pay extra because hospital care was not fully reimbursed, 62% did not know this in advance and 30% indicated that paying extra was a serious problem. CONCLUSIONS: Not all enrollees who choose a policy with restrictive conditions are aware of the consequences of receiving care from non-contracted providers. Increased awareness among enrollees will benefit the functioning of the healthcare system based on managed competition.

The Importance of Choosing a Health Insurance Policy and the Ability to Comprehend That Choice for Citizens in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: In a health insurance system based on managed competition, such as in the Netherlands, it is important that all citizens can make well-informed decisions on which policy fits their needs and preferences best. However, partly due to the large variety of health insurance policies, there are indications that a significant group of citizens do not make rational decisions when choosing a policy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to provide more insight into (1) how important it is for citizens in the Netherlands to choose a health insurance policy and (2) how easy it is for them to comprehend the information they receive. METHODS: Data were collected by sending a survey to members of the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel in February 2017. The response rate was 44% (N = 659). KEY RESULTS: Our results indicate that citizens in the Netherlands acknowledge the importance of choosing a health insurance policy, but they also point out that it is difficult to comprehend health insurance information. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that a section of the citizens do not have the appropriate skills to decide which insurance policy best fits their needs and preferences. Having better insight into their level of health insurance literacy is an important step in the process of evaluating the extent to which citizens can fulfill their role in the health insurance system. Our results suggest that it is important to better tailor information on health insurances to the specific needs and skills of the individual. By doing this, citizens will be better supported in making well-informed decisions regarding health insurance policies, which should have a positive effect on the functioning of the Dutch health insurance system. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2021;5(4):e287-e294.] Plain Language Summary: The number of health insurance policy options to choose from is extensive in the Netherlands. This study explored to what extent citizens in the Netherlands find it important to choose a health insurance policy, and to what extent they comprehend the information they receive. The data were collected in 2017 using the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel.

Using Different Cutoffs to Define Tinnitus and Assess Its Prevalence-A Survey in the Dutch General Population.

Introduction: Tinnitus prevalence numbers in the literature range between 5 and 43%, depending on the studied population and definition. It is unclear when tinnitus becomes pathologic. Objectives: To assess the tinnitus prevalence in the Dutch general population with different cutoffs for definition. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, a questionnaire was sent to a sample (n = 2,251) of the Nivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research) Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel. Three questions were asked to assess the presence of tinnitus, duration, and frequency of the complaint. We classified people as having pathologic tinnitus when participants experienced it for 5-60 min (daily or almost daily or weekly), or tinnitus for >60 min or continuously (daily or almost daily or weekly or monthly), so tinnitus impact on daily life was measured with the Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI) and a single-item question. Answers were stratified to mid-decade years of age. Prevalence numbers were weighted by gender and age to match the Dutch population. Results: Nine hundred thirty-two of 2,251 participants (41%) filled out the questionnaire. The median age was 67.0 (IQR 17) years. Three hundred thirty-eight of 932 (36%) experienced tinnitus for an undefined amount of time during the last year. Two hundred sixteen of 932 (23%) met our definition of having pathologic tinnitus (21% when weighted for age and gender). The median TFI score for all pathologic tinnitus participants was 16.6 (IQR 21.8). A percentage of 50.4% of the pathologic tinnitus participants had a TFI in the range 0-17, which can be interpreted as not a problem. Conclusion: Twenty-three percent (unweighted) or 21% (weighted) of our sample met our definition of pathologic tinnitus, which was based on a combination of duration and frequency over the last year. The TFI score of 47.7% of the pathologic tinnitus participants is ≥18. This indicates that they consider the tinnitus to be at least "a small problem" [11.1% (unweighted) or 8.9% (weighted) of the total study group]. This study illustrates the difficulties with defining pathologic tinnitus. In addition, it demonstrates that tinnitus prevalence numbers vary with different definitions and, consequently, stresses the importance of using a uniform definition of tinnitus.

Relationship between trust and patient involvement in medical decision-making: A cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients vary in their preferences regarding involvement in medical decision-making. Current research does not provide complete explanation for this observed variation. Patient involvement in medical decision-making has been found to be influenced by various mechanisms, one of which could be patients' trust in physicians. The aim of this study was to examine whether trust in physicians fosters or impairs patient involvement in medical decision-making. This study also aimed to determine to what extent the relationship between trust and preferences regarding decision-making roles was influenced by the sociodemographic characteristics of the patients. We hypothesised that trust can both foster and impair patient involvement in medical decision-making. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey was sent out to members of the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel in February 2016 (response rate = 47%, N = 703). The Wake Forest Physician Trust Scale was used to measure trust. Patient involvement was measured using two items based on the study published by Flynn and colleagues in 2006. Multiple regression analysis was used to analyse the relationship between trust and patient involvement. RESULTS: We found a negative relationship between trust and patient involvement in medical decision-making in men. Women with high trust reported to be more involved in medical decision-making compared to men with high trust. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that trust impairs involvement in medical decision-making for men but not for women. Further research could provide a more comprehensive explanation of the variation in patient preferences regarding involvement in medical decision-making to further elucidate which underlying mechanisms could enhance patient participation.

Dynamic Public Perceptions of the Coronavirus Disease Crisis, the Netherlands, 2020.

A key component of outbreak control is monitoring public perceptions and public response. To determine public perceptions and public responses during the first 3 months of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in the Netherlands, we conducted 6 repeated surveys of ≈3,000 persons. Generalized estimating equations analyses revealed changes over time as well as differences between groups at low and high risk. Overall, respondents perceived the risks associated with COVID-19 to be considerable, were positive about the mitigation measures, trusted the information and the measures from authorities, and adopted protective measures. Substantial increases were observed in risk perceptions and self-reported protective behavior in the first weeks of the outbreak. Individual differences were based mainly on participants' age and health condition. We recommend that authorities constantly adjust their COVID-19 communication and mitigation strategies to fit public perceptions and public responses and that they tailor the information for different groups.

Does the chronically ill population in the Netherlands switch their health insurer as often as the general population? Empirical evidence from a nationwide survey study.

BACKGROUND: Consumer mobility is an important aspect of a health insurance system based on managed competition. Both the general population and insured with a chronic illness should enjoy an equal opportunity to switch their insurer every year. We studied possible differences in the rates of switching between these two groups in the Netherlands. METHODS: A structured questionnaire was sent to 1500 members of Nivel's Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel (response rate: 47%) and to 1911 chronically ill members of the National Panel of the Chronically ill and Disabled (response rate: 84%) in February 2016. Associations between switching and background characteristics were estimated using logistic regression analyses with interaction effects. RESULTS: In general, we did not find significant differences in switching rates between the general population and chronically ill population. However, a combination of the population and background characteristics demonstrated that young insured with a chronic illness switched significantly less often than young insured from the general population (1% versus 17%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrated that the group of young people with a chronic illness is less inclined to switch insurer. This observation suggests that this group might either face difficulties or barriers which prevents them from switching, or that they experience a high level of satisfaction with their current insurer. Further research should therefore focus on unravelling the mechanisms which explain the differences in switching rates.

Why do people not switch insurer in a market-based health insurance market? Empirical evidence from the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: In market-based systems, the possibility to switch is an important precondition for a well-functioning health insurance market. To assess whether such a market works as intended, insight into the considerations and perceived barriers of insured is needed. This study examines the rates and reasons for not switching health insurer in the Netherlands, and whether these reasons differ between the general population and the population of people with a chronic illness. METHODS: We made use of survey data collected in 2017 among two panels representing the general population (n = 659, response 44%) and the chronically ill population (n = 1593, response 86%). RESULTS: We found differences regarding the reasons for not switching insurer. The chronically ill population seems to attach more importance to reasons related to the coverage of the health plan, whereas the general population is more focused on the level of service. Some people who considered switching experienced barriers, however, these barriers were not significantly more experienced by the chronically ill population. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals differences between the general population and the chronically ill population when examining reasons for not switching related to quality and coverage. A subset from the people who initially considered to switch experienced barriers which might have altered their decision. Further research is recommended to include questions about information search behaviour to examine which consumers make an informed decision for not switching, and for whom barriers limit switching.

To what degree do patients actively choose their healthcare provider at the point of referral by their GP? A video observation study.

BACKGROUND: Many countries in Europe have implemented managed competition and patient choice during the last decade. With the introduction of managed competition, health insurers also became an important stakeholder. They purchase services on behalf of their customers and are allowed to contract healthcare providers selectively. It has, therefore, become increasingly important to take one's insurance into account when choosing a provider. There is little evidence that patients make active choices in the way that policymakers assume they do. This research aims to investigate, firstly, the role of patients in choosing a healthcare provider at the point of referral, then the role of the GP and, finally, the influence of the health insurer/insurance policies within this process. METHODS: We videotaped a series of everyday consultations between Dutch GPs and their patients during 2015 and 2016. In 117 of these consultations, with 28 GPs, the patient was referred to another healthcare provider. These consultations were coded by three observers using an observation protocol which assessed the role of the patient, GP, and the influence of the health insurer during the referral. RESULTS: Patients were divided into three groups: patients with little or no input, patients with some input, and those with a lot of input. Just over half of the patients (56%) seemed to have some, or a lot of, input into the choice of a healthcare provider at the point of referral by their GP. In addition, in almost half of the consultations (47%), GPs inquired about their patients' preferences regarding a healthcare provider. Topics regarding the health insurance or insurance policy of a patient were rarely (14%) discussed at the point of referral. CONCLUSIONS: Just over half of the patients appear to have some, or a lot of, input into their choice of a healthcare provider at the point of referral by their GP. However, the remainder of the patients had little or no input. If more patient choice continues to be an important aim for policy makers, patients should be encouraged to actively choose the healthcare provider who best fits their needs and preferences.

Trust in times of health reform.

Trust is seen as an important condition for the smooth functioning of institutions, such as the health care system. In this article we describe the trust relationships between the three main actors in the Dutch health care system: patients/insured, healthcare providers and insurers. We used data from different surveys between 2006 and 2016. 2006 was the year of the introduction of an insurance reform in the Netherlands towards regulated competition. In the triangle of trust relationships between the three actors we found strong and mutual trust relationships between patients and healthcare providers and weak trust relationships between healthcare providers and insurers as well as between insured and insurance organisations. This hampers the intended role of insurers as selective purchasers of health care on the basis of quality and price.

Advice from the health insurer as a channelling strategy: a natural experiment at a Dutch health insurance company.

BACKGROUND: In a health care system based on managed competition it is important that health insurers are able to channel their enrolees to preferred care providers. However, enrolees are often very negative about financial incentives and any limitations in their choice of care provider. Therefore, a Dutch health insurance company conducted an experiment to study the effectiveness of a new method of channelling their enrolees. This method entails giving enrolees advise on which physiotherapists to choose when they call customer service. Offering this advice as an extra service is supposed to improve service quality ratings. Objective of this study is to evaluate this channelling method on effectiveness and the impact on service quality ratings. METHODS: In this experiment, one of the health insurer's customer service call teams (pilot team) began advising enrolees on their choice of physiotherapist. Three data sources were used. Firstly, all enrolees who called customer service received an online questionnaire in order to measure their evaluation of the quality of service. Enrolees who were offered advice received a slightly different questionnaire which, in addition, asked about whether they intended to follow the advice they were offered. Multilevel regression analysis was conducted to analyse the difference in service quality ratings between the pilot team and two comparable customer service teams before and after the implementation of the channelling method. Secondly, employees logged each call, registering, if they offered advice, whether the enrolee accepted it, and if so, which care provider was advised. Thirdly, data from the insurance claims were used to see if enrolees visited the recommended physiotherapist. RESULTS: The results of the questionnaire show that enrolees responded favorably to being offered advice on the choice of physiotherapist. Furthermore, 45% of enrolees who received advice and then went on to visit a care provider, followed the advice. The service quality ratings were higher compared to control groups. However, it could not be determined whether this effect was entirely due to the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Channelling enrolees towards preferred care providers by offering advice on their choice of care provider when they call customer service is successful. The effect on service quality seems positive, although a causal relationship could not be determined.