6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Facilitators and barriers to implement the family doctor contracting services in China: findings from a qualitative study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          To identify the facilitators and barriers to implement family doctor contracting services in China by using Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to shed new light on establishing family doctor systems in developing countries.

          Design

          A qualitative study conducted from June to August 2017 using semistructured interview guides for focus group discussions (FGDs) and individual interviews. CFIR was used to guide data coding, data analysis and reporting of findings.

          Setting

          19 primary health institutions in nine provinces purposively selected from the eastern, middle and western areas of China.

          Participants

          From the nine sampled provinces in China, 62 policy makers from health related departments at the province, city and county/district levels participated in 9 FGDs; 19 leaders of primary health institutions participated in individual interviews; and 48 family doctor team members participated in 15 FGDs.

          Results

          Based on CFIR constructs, notable facilitators included national reform involving both top-down and bottom-up policy making (Intervention); support from essential public health funds, fiscal subsidies and health insurance (Outer setting); extra performance-based payments for family doctor teams based on evaluation (Inner setting); and positive engagement of health administrators (Process). Notable barriers included a lack of essential matching mechanisms at national level (Intervention); distrust in the quality of primary care, a lack of government subsidies and health insurance reimbursement and performance ceiling policy (Outer setting); the low competency of family doctors and weak influence of evaluations on performance-based salary (Inner setting); and misunderstandings about family doctor contracting services (Process).

          Conclusions

          The national design with essential features including financing, incentive mechanisms and multidepartment cooperation, was vital for implementing family doctor contracting services in China. More attention should be paid to the quality of primary care and competency of family doctors. All stakeholders must be informed, be involved and participate before and during the process.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to produce actionable findings: a rapid-cycle evaluation approach to improving implementation

          Background Much research does not address the practical needs of stakeholders responsible for introducing health care delivery interventions into organizations working to achieve better outcomes. In this article, we present an approach to using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide systematic research that supports rapid-cycle evaluation of the implementation of health care delivery interventions and produces actionable evaluation findings intended to improve implementation in a timely manner. Methods To present our approach, we describe a formative cross-case qualitative investigation of 21 primary care practices participating in the Comprehensive Primary Care (CPC) initiative, a multi-payer supported primary care practice transformation intervention led by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Qualitative data include observational field notes and semi-structured interviews with primary care practice leadership, clinicians, and administrative and medical support staff. We use intervention-specific codes, and CFIR constructs to reduce and organize the data to support cross-case analysis of patterns of barriers and facilitators relating to different CPC components. Results Using the CFIR to guide data collection, coding, analysis, and reporting of findings supported a systematic, comprehensive, and timely understanding of barriers and facilitators to practice transformation. Our approach to using the CFIR produced actionable findings for improving implementation effectiveness during this initiative and for identifying improvements to implementation strategies for future practice transformation efforts. Conclusions The CFIR is a useful tool for guiding rapid-cycle evaluation of the implementation of practice transformation initiatives. Using the approach described here, we systematically identified where adjustments and refinements to the intervention could be made in the second year of the 4-year intervention. We think the approach we describe has broad application and encourage others to use the CFIR, along with intervention-specific codes, to guide the efficient and rigorous analysis of rich qualitative data. Trial registration NCT02318108 Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-017-0550-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The effects of gatekeeping: a systematic review of the literature.

            To assess the effects of physician-centred gatekeeping on health, health care utilization, and costs by conducting a systematic review of the literature. Systematic search in PubMed (MEDLINE and Pre-MEDLINE), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, from the databases' respective inception dates up to January 2010, using the search words "gatekeeping", "gatekeeper*", "first contact", and "self-referral". We included RCTs, CCTs, cohort studies, CBAs, and interrupted time-series. We included only studies in which the gatekeeper function was exercised by a physician and that reported health and patient-related outcomes including quality of life and satisfaction, quality of care, health care utilization, and/or economic outcomes (e.g. expenditures or efficiency). Selection was made independently by two reviewers and discrepancies were solved by consensus after discussion. Data on target population, intervention, additional interventions, study results, and methodological quality were extracted. Methodological quality was assessed independently by two reviewers following the previously defined criteria. Discrepancies were solved by consensus after discussion. This review includes 26 studies in 32 publications. The majority of studies (62%) reported data from the United States and in most gatekeeping was associated with lower utilization of health services (up to -78%) and lower expenditures (up to -80%). However, there was great variability in the magnitude and direction of the differences. Overall, the evidence regarding the effects of gatekeeping is of limited quality. Many studies are available regarding the effects on health care utilisation and expenditures, whereas effects on health and patient-related outcomes have been studied only exceptionally and are inconclusive.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Mobility of primary health care workers in China

              Background Rural township health centres and urban community health centres play a crucial role in the delivery of primary health care in China. Over the past two-and-a-half decades, these health institutions have not been as well developed as high-level hospitals. The limited availability and low qualifications of human resources in health are among the main challenges facing lower-level health facilities. This paper aims to analyse the mobility of health workers in township and community health centres. Methods Data used in this paper come from a nationwide survey of health facilities in 2006. Ten provinces in different locations and of varying levels of economic development were selected. From these provinces, 119 rural township health centres and 89 urban community health centres were selected to participate in a questionnaire survey. Thirty key informants were selected from these health facilities to be interviewed. Results In 2005, 8.1% and 8.9% of health workers left township and community health centres, respectively. The health workers in rural township health centres had three to 13 years of work experience and typically had received a formal medical education. The majority of the mobile health workers moved to higher-level health facilities; very few moved to other rural township health centres. The rates of workers leaving township and community health centres increased between 2000 and 2005, with the main reasons for leaving being low salaries, limited opportunities for professional development and poor living conditions. Conclusion In China, primary health workers in township health centres and community health centres move to higher-level facilities due to low salaries, limited opportunities for promotion and poor living conditions. The government already has policies in place to counteract this migration, but it must step up enforcement if rural township health centres and urban community centres are to retain health professionals and recruit qualified health workers.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2019
                8 October 2019
                : 9
                : 10
                : e032444
                Affiliations
                [1] departmentCentre for Health System and Policy , Institute of Medical Information & Library, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College , Beijing, China
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Professor Fang Wang; wang.fang@ 123456imicams.ac.cn ; 359959291@ 123456qq.com
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5091-6688
                Article
                bmjopen-2019-032444
                10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032444
                6797329
                31597653
                9bac7606-3b1a-4e21-906a-74e5886ebf18
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 19 June 2019
                : 28 August 2019
                : 24 September 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (CIFMS);
                Award ID: [2016-I2M-3-018]
                Categories
                Health Policy
                Original Research
                1506
                1703
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                family doctor system,primary care,consolidated framework for implementation research (cfir),qualitative research,contracting services

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content40

                Cited by30

                Most referenced authors322