The prevalence of medical services use. How comparable are the results of large-scale population surveys in Germany?

Psycho-social medicine Pub Date : 2012-01-01 Epub Date: 2012-10-25 DOI:10.3205/psm000088
Enno Swart
{"title":"The prevalence of medical services use. How comparable are the results of large-scale population surveys in Germany?","authors":"Enno Swart","doi":"10.3205/psm000088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The large-scale representative population surveys conducted by Germany's Robert Koch Institute (RKI) contain questions pertaining to health and its determinants as well as the prevalence and frequency of outpatient services utilization. The same holds for the Socioeconomic Panel (SOEP, Sozio-ökonomisches Panel) and the Bertelsmann Healthcare Monitor (Gesundheitsmonitor) surveys. The purpose of this study is to examine the comparability of the instruments used in these surveys and their results.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The questions on outpatient care utilization examined in this study were taken from the public use files of the East-West Health Survey (Ost-West Survey; OW1991), the 1998 Federal National Health Survey (Bundesgesundheitssurvey; BGS1998), the 2003 Telephone Health Survey (TEL2003), and the 2009 German Health Update (Gesundheit in Deutschland aktuell GEDA2009). The study also used data from the 26 waves of the SOEP (1984-2009) and the 16 waves of the Bertelsmann Healthcare Monitor (2001-2009) studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the OW1991 and the BGS1998, questions on outpatient services utilization differ by the types of physicians inquired about. The four-week prevalence of contact with general practitioneers (GP) was 29% in the OW1991; the twelve-month prevalence in the BGS1998 was 69%. The OW1991 and the BGS1998 also surveyed participants on the number of physician contacts made during those reference periods (average number of contacts: 1.8 over the previous four weeks (OW1991) and 4.9 over the previous 12 months (BGS1998)). The TEL2003 inquires into the three-month prevalence of contact with private practice physicians in general (63%) as well as the number of contacts with primary care physicians over the previous twelve months (88% with at least one contact, average number of contacts: 4.6, range: 1-92). In the GEDA2009 survey, 88% of participants reported having contacted a physician at least once over the previous twelve months and an average of 6.1 contacts with all physicians working under contract with the German statutory health insurance (SHI) funds. The 2009 SOEP survey revealed a 28% three-month prevalence of contact with all types of physicians and an average of 3.6 contacts (among participants who had made at least one contact during this period). According to the Bertelsmann Health Monitor, the twelve-month prevalence of contact with GPs was 82%, with the average number of contacts being 5.0. The Bertelsmann Health Monitor also surveys participants on contacts made with four other types of physicians; the OW1991 and the BGS1998 ask about contacts made with over ten different types of physicians when examining the frequency of services use.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Not only do the target groups of the RKI surveys, the SOEP and the Bertelsmann Health Monitor differ; their questions on outpatient care utilization also differ in terms of examined reference period and types of physicians contacted by survey participants, question wording including clarifications (e.g., asking the participant to also consider contacts not made \"in person\" with physicians when answering a question), and response categories. Therefore, unlike the results of the surveys' questions on inpatient care, the results of questions on the use of outpatient care services are not easily comparable, even those regarding contact with primary care physicians and GPs. The results of secondary analyses of German SHI claims data could be used to confirm the external validity of the surveys' results.</p>","PeriodicalId":88305,"journal":{"name":"Psycho-social medicine","volume":"9 ","pages":"Doc10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/41/22/PSM-09-10.PMC3488806.pdf","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psycho-social medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3205/psm000088","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/10/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

Background: The large-scale representative population surveys conducted by Germany's Robert Koch Institute (RKI) contain questions pertaining to health and its determinants as well as the prevalence and frequency of outpatient services utilization. The same holds for the Socioeconomic Panel (SOEP, Sozio-ökonomisches Panel) and the Bertelsmann Healthcare Monitor (Gesundheitsmonitor) surveys. The purpose of this study is to examine the comparability of the instruments used in these surveys and their results.

Methods: The questions on outpatient care utilization examined in this study were taken from the public use files of the East-West Health Survey (Ost-West Survey; OW1991), the 1998 Federal National Health Survey (Bundesgesundheitssurvey; BGS1998), the 2003 Telephone Health Survey (TEL2003), and the 2009 German Health Update (Gesundheit in Deutschland aktuell GEDA2009). The study also used data from the 26 waves of the SOEP (1984-2009) and the 16 waves of the Bertelsmann Healthcare Monitor (2001-2009) studies.

Results: In the OW1991 and the BGS1998, questions on outpatient services utilization differ by the types of physicians inquired about. The four-week prevalence of contact with general practitioneers (GP) was 29% in the OW1991; the twelve-month prevalence in the BGS1998 was 69%. The OW1991 and the BGS1998 also surveyed participants on the number of physician contacts made during those reference periods (average number of contacts: 1.8 over the previous four weeks (OW1991) and 4.9 over the previous 12 months (BGS1998)). The TEL2003 inquires into the three-month prevalence of contact with private practice physicians in general (63%) as well as the number of contacts with primary care physicians over the previous twelve months (88% with at least one contact, average number of contacts: 4.6, range: 1-92). In the GEDA2009 survey, 88% of participants reported having contacted a physician at least once over the previous twelve months and an average of 6.1 contacts with all physicians working under contract with the German statutory health insurance (SHI) funds. The 2009 SOEP survey revealed a 28% three-month prevalence of contact with all types of physicians and an average of 3.6 contacts (among participants who had made at least one contact during this period). According to the Bertelsmann Health Monitor, the twelve-month prevalence of contact with GPs was 82%, with the average number of contacts being 5.0. The Bertelsmann Health Monitor also surveys participants on contacts made with four other types of physicians; the OW1991 and the BGS1998 ask about contacts made with over ten different types of physicians when examining the frequency of services use.

Conclusions: Not only do the target groups of the RKI surveys, the SOEP and the Bertelsmann Health Monitor differ; their questions on outpatient care utilization also differ in terms of examined reference period and types of physicians contacted by survey participants, question wording including clarifications (e.g., asking the participant to also consider contacts not made "in person" with physicians when answering a question), and response categories. Therefore, unlike the results of the surveys' questions on inpatient care, the results of questions on the use of outpatient care services are not easily comparable, even those regarding contact with primary care physicians and GPs. The results of secondary analyses of German SHI claims data could be used to confirm the external validity of the surveys' results.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

医疗服务使用率。德国大规模人口调查结果的可比性如何?
背景:德国罗伯特科赫研究所(RKI)进行的大规模代表性人口调查包含有关健康及其决定因素以及门诊服务使用率和频率的问题。社会经济小组(SOEP, Sozio-ökonomisches小组)和贝塔斯曼医疗保健监测(Gesundheitsmonitor)调查也是如此。本研究的目的是检验这些调查中使用的工具及其结果的可比性。方法:本研究调查的门诊服务利用问题取自东西方健康调查(East-West Survey;1998年联邦全国健康调查(Bundesgesundheitssurvey);BGS1998)、2003年电话健康调查(TEL2003)和2009年德国健康最新情况(Gesundheit in Deutschland aktuell GEDA2009)。该研究还使用了26波SOEP(1984-2009)和16波贝塔斯曼医疗保健监测(2001-2009)研究的数据。结果:在OW1991和BGS1998中,门诊服务利用的问题因询问医生的类型而不同。在1991年的调查中,与全科医生接触的四周患病率为29%;1998年bgs12个月患病率为69%。调查还调查了参与者在这些参考期内与医生的接触次数(平均接触次数:在过去四周1.8次(调查1991)和在过去12个月4.9次(调查1998))。TEL2003调查了三个月与私人执业医生接触的普遍程度(63%),以及在过去12个月内与初级保健医生接触的次数(88%至少接触过一次,平均接触次数:4.6次,范围:1-92次)。在2009年GEDA2009调查中,88%的参与者报告说,他们在过去12个月里至少与医生联系过一次,与所有根据德国法定健康保险基金合同工作的医生平均联系了6.1次。2009年SOEP调查显示,三个月内与各类医生接触的患病率为28%,平均接触3.6次(在此期间至少接触过一次的参与者中)。根据贝塔斯曼健康监测,与全科医生接触的12个月流行率为82%,平均接触次数为5.0次。贝塔斯曼健康监测还调查了参与者与其他四种类型的医生的接触情况;在调查使用服务的频率时,1991年和1998年的健康调查问卷询问了与十多种不同类型的医生的联系情况。结论:不仅RKI调查的目标群体、SOEP和贝塔斯曼健康监测存在差异;他们关于门诊护理利用的问题在调查的参考期和调查参与者联系的医生类型、问题措辞包括澄清(例如,要求参与者在回答问题时也考虑与医生没有“亲自”接触)和回答类别方面也有所不同。因此,与调查的住院护理问题的结果不同,使用门诊护理服务的问题的结果不容易比较,即使是那些与初级保健医生和全科医生接触的问题。德国SHI索赔数据的二次分析结果可用于确认调查结果的外部有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书