Evaluation of Continuity of Care: What Can Physician Survey Add?

Background: The evaluation of continuity of care is usually based on the indicators of the frequency of patients' contacts with specific providers. There are some first attempts to use physician survey for the evaluation. Objective: Is to get additional information on the continuity of care in Russia by a newly developed physician questionnaire with detailed questions related to the specific areas of providers' interaction in the health system. Methods: The questionnaire was developed to increase the number of characteristics and indicators for the evaluation of informational, longitudinal and interpersonal continuity. Each of 17 questions was pretested by a group of experts. A small physician survey was conducted through the mobile App with 2690 respondents. A sample is skewed to young and urban respondents. The attempts have been made to increase its representativeness. Results and discussion: We identified the areas of low continuity of care in Russia. Access to electronic medical records is limited. Outpatient and inpatient physicians rarely contact with each other. Primary care physicians are unaware of the substantial part of hospital admissions and emergency visits of their patients, which makes them unprepared for the follow-up treatment. Home visits to patients with heart attack and stroke after hospital discharge are rare. The lack of timely transfer of hospital cases to rehabilitative and social care settings also limits continuity of care. However, a small scale of the survey and its online operation limit its representativeness and robustness. Bigger scale of the survey with the same or similar questionnaire can improve its results. Conclusion: Physician survey can be a useful instrument of care continuity evaluation. The content of the suggested survey can be valuable for collecting the international evidence.

The hard way from the Beveridge to the Bismarck model of health finance: Expectations and reality in Russia.

Most post-Soviet countries have introduced mandatory health insurance (MHI) systems which completely or partially replaced national health systems known as budgetary models. In Russia, an attempt was made to introduce a competitive MHI model with multiple health insurers. The current MHI system has, however, acquired an increasing number of features inherent in the previous budgetary model. This study analyzes the institutional characteristics and the outcomes of a new mixed model. A combination of two analytical approaches is used as follows: (1) considering three functions of the financing system (revenue collection, pooling funds, and purchasing healthcare) and (2) exploring three types of the model regulation (state, societal, and market). We analyze the types of regulation that are used to implement each of the three financial functions. The model has contributed to more sustainable health funding, its geographical equalization, and service delivery restructuring, while the implementation of its purchasing function has many unsolved problems. We highlight the dilemma of the further development of the model by (a) continuing to replace the remaining market and societal regulatory mechanisms with state regulations or (b) developing market mechanisms and thereby strengthening the impact of health insurers on the health system performance. Lessons for countries considering the transformation of their budgetary health finance model to the MHI model are presented.

Health workforce policy in the Russian Federation: How to overcome a shortage of physicians?

Russia looks for ways to overcome a shortage of physicians. Health workforce policy is focused on training an additional number of physicians. The current efforts have reduced some areas of the shortage but failed to solve the problem due to many factors that reproduce the deficit. A distorted structure of service delivery with weak primary care generates demand for outpatient specialists and hospital doctors and requires a perpetual increase in their number. The lack of long-term labor planning results in the oversupply of some specialties and the shortage of others. The regulation of post-graduate training is not enough to improve the allocation of physicians across specialties and health system sectors. We argue that an extensive increase in the number of physicians without changing their composition will hardly change the situation. A more active structural policy is required with a focus on strengthening primary care and improving planning and regulation of health workforce structure.

What next for the polyclinic? New models of primary health care are required in many former Soviet Union countries.

BACKGROUND: There is unfinished reform in primary care in Russia and other former Soviet Union (FSU) countries. The traditional 'Semashko' multi-specialty polyclinic model has been retained, while its major characteristics are increasingly questioned. The search for a new model is on a health policy agenda. It is relevant for many other countries. OBJECTIVES: In this paper, we explore the strengths and weaknesses of the multi-specialty polyclinic model currently found in Russia and other FSU countries, as well as the features of the emerging multi-disciplinary and large-scale primary care models internationally. The comparison of the two is a major research question. Health policy implications are discussed. METHODS: We use data from two physicians' surveys and recent literature to identify the characteristics of multi-specialty polyclinics, indicators of their performance and the evaluation in the specific country context. The review of the literature is used to describe new primary care models internationally. RESULTS: The Semashko polyclinic model has lost some of its original strengths due to the excessive specialization of service delivery. We demonstrate the strengths of extended practices in Western countries and conclude that FSU countries should "leapfrog" the phase of developing solo practices and build a multi-disciplinary model similar to the extended practices model in Europe. The latter may act as a 'golden mean' between the administrative dominance of the polyclinic model and the limited capacity of solo practices. The new model requires a separation of primary care and outpatient specialty care, with the transformation of polyclinics into centers of outpatient diagnostic and specialty services that become part of hospital services while working closely with primary care. CONCLUSION: The comprehensiveness of care in a big setting and potential economies of scale, which are major strengths of the polyclinic model, should be retained in the provision of specialty care rather than primary care. Internationally, there are lessons about the risks associated with models based on narrow specialization in caring for patients who increasingly have multiple conditions.

Structural changes in the Russian health care system: do they match European trends?

ВACKGROUND: In the last two decades, health care systems (HCS) in the European countries have faced global challenges and have undergone structural changes with the focus on early disease prevention, strengthening primary care, changing the role of hospitals, etc. Russia has inherited the Semashko model from the USSR with dominance of inpatient care, and has been looking for the ways to improve the structure of service delivery. This paper compares the complex of structural changes in the Russian and the European HCS. METHODS: We address major developments in four main areas of medical care delivery: preventive activities, primary care, inpatient care, long-term care. Our focus is on the changes in the organizational structure and activities of health care providers, and in their interaction to improve service delivery. To describe the ongoing changes, we use both qualitative characteristics and quantitative indicators. We extracted the relevant data from the national and international databases and reports and calculated secondary estimates. We also used data from our survey of physicians and interviews with top managers in medical care system. RESULTS: The main trends of structural changes in Russia HCS are similar to the changes in most EU countries. The prevention and the early detection of diseases have developed intensively. The reduction in hospital bed capacity and inpatient care utilization has been accompanied by a decrease in the average length of hospital stay. Russia has followed the European trend of service delivery concentration in hospital-physician complexes, while the increase in the average size of hospitals is even more substantial. However, distinctions in health care delivery organization in Russia are still significant. Changes in primary care are much less pronounced, the system remains hospital centered. Russia lags behind the European leaders in terms of horizontal ties between providers. The reasons for inadequate structural changes are rooted in the governance of service delivery. CONCLUSION: The structural transformations must be intensified with the focus on strengthening primary care, further integration of care, and development of new organizational structures that mitigate the dependence on inpatient care.

Vertical program of screenings and check-ups in the Russian Federation: design, implementation and lessons learnt.

BACKGROUND: The Russian Federation has introduced a vertical large-scale program of 'dispensarization' (Program) that includes health check-ups and screenings for the entire adult population. It is expected to improve the results of medical interventions and ensure health gains at a relatively low cost. The major research question: Does the design and implementation of the program meet the expectations? METHODS: We analyze regulatory acts and the literature on the design and the outcomes of the Program. Physicians' surveys and interviews are conducted to understand the capacity of primary care providers to meet the requirements of the Program, as well as the link between the early identification of new illnesses and their follow-up management, administration of the program, the barriers to its successful implementation. RESULTS: There is a substantial progress in the coverage of the population and increase in the number of identified illnesses. Some specific instruments of the Program implementation work well, others require more careful design and additional integrative and managerial activities. The capacity of primary care providers does not allow to provide high quality preventive services, as well as to ensure a continuum of preventive and curative work. The pattern of the Program administration facilitates its nation-wide implementation according to the unified rules, but makes it more difficult to account for the local conditions and limits the autonomy of professionals to choose specific population risk groups and a list of services. The interaction of providers in preventive activities is inadequate. CONCLUSION: The expectations of the Program are too high due to the inconsistencies in its design and implementation. The major lesson learnt is that the program like this should meet the capacity of primary care and be designed as a complex of interrelated activities to identify illnesses and provide their follow-up management.

Using Targets to Reduce Waiting Times for Elective Care: What Can We Learn from the Russian Experience?

This article explores the potential for maximum waiting times targets to improve access to healthcare in a country with limited financial resources. The study combines policy analysis, off-the-record communications, face-to-face interviews, public opinion surveys and open access patient complaints to create a rich picture of how waiting time targets are monitored and implemented in theory and practice. The study found that most waiting time targets in the Russian Federation are unrealistically low, while institutional and operational arrangements for their implementation have not been built in most regions. Estimates of actual waiting times are fragmented and unreliable. The lack of meaningful regulation and monitoring encourages opportunistic behavior among health providers to meet the targets while there is growing uncertainty among patients. Maximum waiting times targets alone are insufficient to reduce excessive waiting times. Successful implementation relies on robust data systems and standardized measurements for waiting times as well as meaningful regulation and monitoring.

The evolving Semashko model of primary health care: the case of the Russian Federation.

This paper addresses the major developments in primary care in the Russian Federation under the evolving Semashko model. The overview of the original model and its current version indicates some positive characteristics, including the financial accessibility of care, focus on prevention, patient lists, and gatekeeping by primary-care providers. However, in practice these characteristics do not work according to expectations. The current primary-care system is inefficient and has low quality of care by international standards. The major reasons for the gap between the positive characteristics of the model and the actual developments are discussed, including the excessive specialization of primary care, weak health-workforce policy, the delay in the shift to a general practitioner model, and the dominance of the multispecialty polyclinic, which does not prove advantageous over alternative models. Government attempts to strengthen primary care cover a wide range of activities, but they are not enough to improve the system and cannot do this without more a systematic and consistent approach. The major lesson learnt is that the lack of generalists and coordination cannot be compensated for by the growing number of specialists in the staff of primary-care facilities. Big multispecialty settings (polyclinics in the Russian context) have the potential for more integrated service delivery, but to make it happen, action is needed. Simple decisions, like merging polyclinics, do not help much.

Too many and too few: The paradoxical case of physicians in the Russian Federation.

There is a paradox characterising the Russian health workforce. By international standards, Russia has a very high number of physicians per capita but at the same time is confronted by chronic real shortages of qualified physicians. This paper explores the reasons for this paradox by examining the structural characteristics of health workforce development in the context of the Soviet legacy and the comparative performance of other European countries. The paper uses data on comparative health workforce dynamics to argue that Russia is a European laggard, before then evaluating recent and current policies within that context. The health workforce challenges facing all low- and middle-income countries are acute, and this paper confirms this IS the case for Russia-Europe's largest country. The paper argues that the physician shortage is driven by the model of health workforce development inherited from the Soviet period, with its emphasis on quantitative rather than structural indicators. We find that, in contrast to most European Union countries, Russia's stalled reform process leaves it facing a chronic shortage of appropriately trained physicians. We document the costs of failed and slow reforms during the last 2 decades, while cautiously welcoming some recent policy initiatives.

Evaluation of health care delivery integration: the case of the Russian Federation.

Fragmentation in organization and discontinuities in the provision of medical care are problems in all health systems, whether it is the mixed public-private one in the USA, national health services in the UK, or insurance based one in Western Europe and Russia. In all of these countries a major challenge is to strengthen integration in order to enhance efficiency and health outcomes. This article assesses issues related to fragmentation and integration in conceptual terms and argues that key attributes of integration are teamwork, coordination and continuity of care. It then presents a summary of service integration problems in Russia and the results of a large survey of physicians concerning the attributes of integration. It is argued that characteristics of the national service delivery model don't ensure integration. The Semashko model is not an equivalent to the integrated model. Big organizational forms of service provision, like polyclinics and integrated hospital-polyclinics, don't have higher scores of integration indicators than smaller ones. Proposals to improve integration in Russia are presented with the focus on the regular evaluation of integration/fragmentation, regulation of integration activities, enhancing the role of PHC providers, economic incentives.

Opportunities and limitations of patient choice: the case of the Russian Federation.

While many countries have increased the opportunities for patient choice of provider, there is debate to what extent this has had positive effects on efficiency and quality of healthcare provision. First, some conditions should be met to exercise such choice, of which the most important is the provision of reliable data on providers' performance to both patients and physicians as their agents, as well as increasing primary health care (PHC) providers' involvement in realization of patient choice. Second, expanding patient choice does not always lead to efficient allocation of resources in a healthcare system. This article explores these controversial developments by using empirical evidence from the Russian Federation. It shows that choice indeed has value for patients, but there are many areas of inefficient choice, which leads to misallocation of healthcare recourses. Thus, health policy in this area should be designed to ensure a reasonable balance between objectives of expanding choice and promoting more efficient organization of healthcare provision. Political rhetoric about unlimited patient choice may be useless and even risky unless supported by well-balanced programmes of supporting and managing choice.

Rocky road from the Semashko to a new health model. Interview by Fiona Fleck.

Health care is receiving much higher priority and more funds than ever before in the Russian Federation. Russian health economist Igor Sheiman talks to Fiona Fleck.

Prospects for regulated competition in the health care system: what can China learn from Russia's experience?

As China explores new directions to reform its health care system, regulated competition among both insurers and providers of care might be one potential model. The Russian Federation in 1993 implemented legislation intended to stimulate such regulated competition in the health care sector. The subsequent progress and lessons learned over these 17 years can shed light on and inform the future evolution of the Chinese system. In this paper, we list the necessary pre-conditions for reaping the benefits of regulated competition in the health care sector. We indicate to what extent these conditions are being fulfilled in the post-reform Russian and current Chinese health care systems. We draw lessons from the Russian experience for the Chinese health care system, which shares a similar economic and political background with the pre-reform Russian health care system in terms of the starting point of the reform, and analyse the prospects for regulated competition in China.