10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Primary care physicians’ satisfaction after health care reform: a cross-sectional study from two cities in Central Java, Indonesia

      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

          Background

          In 2014, Indonesia launched a mandatory national health insurance system called Jaminan Kesehatan Nasional (JKN). The reform introduced new conditions for primary care physicians (PCPs) that could influence their job satisfaction. This study assessed PCPs’ satisfaction and its predictors in two cities in Central Java, Indonesia, following the reform.

          Methods

          In this exploratory, cross-sectional study, we recruited 276 PCPs from the selected area. The data were all collected in 2016 using self-report questionnaires and interviews. PCPs’ satisfaction was measured using a modified version of the Warr-Cook-Wall Job Satisfaction Scale which contains 19 items and uses a Likert-type response scale. Analysis of variance, the Kruskal-Wallis H test, both with Bonferroni corrections for post hoc testing, and Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel tests were used to compare overall job satisfaction between participant groups. We used simple and multiple linear regression analyses to identify the predictors of PCP satisfaction. Furthermore, a logistic regression analysis for binary outcome was applied to model the PCPs intention to leave practice.

          Results

          PCPs’ mean overall satisfaction level was 3.19 out of 5. They tended to be very satisfied with their relationship with colleagues, working hours, and physical working conditions. However, the PCPs were dissatisfied with the new referral system, the JKN health services standards, and JKN policy. The factors significantly associated with job satisfaction ( p <  0.001) included type of practice, performance of managerial tasks, and PCPs’ perceptions of and experiences with patients. PCP satisfaction was negatively associated ( p = 0.004) with PCPs’ intention to leave their practice.

          Conclusions

          The PCPs investigated in these two cities in Central Java had moderate satisfaction after the Indonesian health care reform. PCPs who worked in solo practices, performed managerial tasks, and had good experiences with patients tended to have higher satisfaction scores, which in turn prevented them from developing an intention to leave their practice. The three aspects that PCPs with which most dissatisfied were related with the JKN reform. Because of that, the government and BPJS for Health should aim to improve the JKN system in order to increase PCPs’ satisfaction.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4121-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Analyzing Likert Data

          This article provides information for Extension professionals on the correct analysis of Likert data. The analyses of Likert-type and Likert scale data require unique data analysis procedures, and as a result, misuses and/or mistakes often occur. This article discusses the differences between Likert-type and Likert scale data and provides recommendations for descriptive statistics to be used during the analysis. Once a researcher understands the difference between Likert-type and Likert scale data, the decision on appropriate statistical procedures will be apparent.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Germany: Health system review.

            This analysis of the German health system reviews recent developments in organization and governance, health financing, health care provision, health reforms and health system performance. In the German health care system, decision-making powers are traditionally shared between national (federal) and state (Land) levels, with much power delegated to self-governing bodies. It provides universal coverage for a wide range of benefits. Since 2009, health insurance has been mandatory for all citizens and permanent residents, through either statutory or private health insurance. A total of 70 million people or 85% of the population are covered by statutory health insurance in one of 132 sickness funds in early 2014. Another 11% are covered by substitutive private health insurance. Characteristics of the system are free choice of providers and unrestricted access to all care levels. A key feature of the health care delivery system in Germany is the clear institutional separation between public health services, ambulatory care and hospital (inpatient) care. This has increasingly been perceived as a barrier to change and so provisions for integrated care are being introduced with the aim of improving cooperation between ambulatory physicians and hospitals. Germany invests a substantial amount of its resources on health care: 11.4% of gross domestic product in 2012, which is one of the highest levels in the European Union. In international terms, the German health care system has a generous benefit basket, one of the highest levels of capacity as well as relatively low cost-sharing. However, the German health care system still needs improvement in some areas, such as the quality of care. In addition, the division into statutory and private health insurance remains one of the largest challenges for the German health care system, as it leads to inequalities.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Comparing the job satisfaction and intention to leave of different categories of health workers in Tanzania, Malawi, and South Africa

              Background Job satisfaction is an important determinant of health worker motivation, retention, and performance, all of which are critical to improving the functioning of health systems in low- and middle-income countries. A number of small-scale surveys have measured the job satisfaction and intention to leave of individual health worker cadres in different settings, but there are few multi-country and multi-cadre comparative studies. Objective The objective of this study was to compare the job satisfaction and intention to leave of different categories of health workers in Tanzania, Malawi, and South Africa. Methods We undertook a cross-sectional survey of a stratified cluster sample of 2,220 health workers, 564 from Tanzania, 939 from Malawi, and 717 from South Africa. Participants completed a self-administered questionnaire, which included demographic information, a 10-item job satisfaction scale, and one question on intention to leave. Multiple regression was used to identify significant predictors of job satisfaction and intention to leave. Results There were statistically significant differences in job satisfaction and intention to leave between the three countries. Approximately 52.1% of health workers in South Africa were satisfied with their jobs compared to 71% from Malawi and 82.6% from Tanzania (χ2=140.3, p<0.001). 18.8% of health workers in Tanzania and 26.5% in Malawi indicated that they were actively seeking employment elsewhere, compared to 41.4% in South Africa (χ2=83.5, p<0.001). The country differences were confirmed by multiple regression. The study also confirmed that job satisfaction is statistically related to intention to leave. Conclusions We have shown differences in the levels of job satisfaction and intention to leave between different groups of health workers from Tanzania, Malawi, and South Africa. Our results caution against generalising about the effectiveness of interventions in different contexts and highlight the need for less standardised and more targeted HRH strategies than has been practised to date.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                maharani@stud.uni-heidelberg.de , chatila_maharani@mail.unnes.ac.id
                desie.afief@gmail.com
                weber@imbi.uni-heidelberg.de
                michael.marx@urz.uni-heidelberg.de
                +49(0)6221-56-4744 , svetla.loukanova@med.uni-heidelberg.de
                Journal
                BMC Health Serv Res
                BMC Health Serv Res
                BMC Health Services Research
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6963
                8 May 2019
                8 May 2019
                2019
                : 19
                : 290
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2190 4373, GRID grid.7700.0, Heidelberg Institute of Global Health, Medical Faculty and University Hospital, , University of Heidelberg, ; Heidelberg, Germany
                [2 ]GRID grid.444273.2, Department of Public Health, , Universitas Negeri Semarang, ; Semarang, Indonesia
                [3 ]Public Health Unit, Central Java Provincial Health Office, Semarang, Indonesia
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2190 4373, GRID grid.7700.0, Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, , University of Heidelberg, ; Heidelberg, Germany
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2190 4373, GRID grid.7700.0, Department of General Practice and Implementation Research, , University of Heidelberg, ; Heidelberg, Germany
                [6 ]Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, Marsilius-Arkaden, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, Turm West, 3 OG, Raum 03.303, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany
                Article
                4121
                10.1186/s12913-019-4121-2
                6505224
                31068209
                f2e3c3dc-0a6b-4c85-adc3-171057d90a13
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 19 October 2018
                : 24 April 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003542, Ministerium für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Kunst Baden-Württemberg;
                Award ID: IN-1150438
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Health & Social care
                job satisfaction,general practitioners,primary health care,health care reform,national health insurance

                Comments

                Comment on this article