SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.36 issue3Gender analysis of the Spanish Fertility Survey 2018Inadequate use of the Istanbul Protocol in the assessment of torture victims by forensic professionals in Mexico author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


Gaceta Sanitaria

Print version ISSN 0213-9111

Abstract

RODRIGUEZ-EGUIZABAL, Eva et al. Evaluation of health center's primary care responsiveness by patients with chronic illnesses. Gac Sanit [online]. 2022, vol.36, n.3, pp.232-239.  Epub Sep 30, 2022. ISSN 0213-9111.  https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2021.02.008.

Objective:

To evaluate the health systems’ response capacity according to the perception of chronic patients, and the factors related to that perception.

Method:

Source of data: patients diagnosed with at least one chronic disease who visited primary care centers during June and July 2015 in a basic health area of La Rioja.

Design:

cross-sectional descriptive study based on interviews to over 18s who visited primary care centers. The dependent variable was the health systems’ response capacity and independent variables were sociodemographic and health related. In order to collect data, trained interviewers conducted a short questionnaire in Spanish from the World Health Organization Multi-country Survey Study with 403 subjects. Descriptive statistics, bivariate and multivariate logistic regression were performed.

Results:

The overall health systems’ response capacity was considered good by 87.10%. The domains that scored highest were: confidentiality (99.3%), dignity (98.3%) and communication (97.3%). Those evaluated worst were: rapid service (38,6%) and quality of basic services (31.8%). Low social class was the most important factor associated with the responsiveness, mainly with autonomy and rapid service. Sex, educational level, and occupation were related to communication domain, and patients with worse perceived health rated the general response worse. The domains considered most important were dignity (33.5%) and rapid service (30.5%).

Conclusions:

The domains best evaluated were those related to respect for people. Rapid service has a low health systems’ response capacity, but a high importance, and therefore requires priority action.

Keywords : Chronic diseases; Health system; Response capacity of the health system; Primary care.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in Spanish     · Spanish ( pdf )