Background: Overcrowding of emergency departments (ED) during out-of-hours health care is a common problem in many Western countries. An appealing alternative for ED’s is the general practices cooperatives (GPC): reg...Background: Overcrowding of emergency departments (ED) during out-of-hours health care is a common problem in many Western countries. An appealing alternative for ED’s is the general practices cooperatives (GPC): regional networks of GP’s during the out-of-hours. The aim of this study is to investigate the socio-economic determinants of patients’ choice to opt for one of both health care providers. Methods: We gathered patient level data between May and December 2012 in Flanders (Belgium) from three emergency departments and three general practices cooperatives. Chi square analyses were used in order to study the bivariate relationship between opting for a health care facility (ED or GPC) and various socio-economic factors. To determine the independent association, a logistic regression analysis was conducted. Results: Self-referral to the ED is significantly associated with: being male, being younger, being less educated, having a (lower educated) partner and living in a rural area. Conclusion: The results of this study show that opting for the ED during the out-of-hours is, in general, related to a lower socio-economic status. Therefore the government should focus on patients with a lower socio-economic status when disseminating information on the organisation of health care with an emphasis on the accessibility of the primary health care during out-of-hours. To meet the needs for health care during these out-of-hours, a possible solution could be an integrated facility of GPC and ED with one access to medical care for all patients.展开更多
During the last decennia, social capital has been a popular topic in social sciences. However, the concept is often used as a “catch all” for divers social characteristics. Consensus on how the concept should be mea...During the last decennia, social capital has been a popular topic in social sciences. However, the concept is often used as a “catch all” for divers social characteristics. Consensus on how the concept should be measured is lacking. This keeps health researchers from drawing firm conclusions on the influence of social capital on health and hampers the decision on which social capital indicators to use in health research. This study compares five ways to operationalise social capital (generalized trust, a social network index, an expanded social network index, bonding, bridging and linking social capital and a multidimensional social capital index) in their ability to explain self-rated health and pain. To evaluate the models’ capacity to explain health, two logistic regression models were built, resulting in Nagelkerke R2 measures. Data were collected in a cross-sectional study in eight neighbourhoods in the region of Ghent (Belgium) by randomly sampling 50 adult inhabitants per neighbourhood. Findings show that the explanation of the observed variance in health by the studied social capital models ranges from 1.9% to 23.1%, but is more pronounced for self-rated health than for pain. The multidimensional social capital index explains most of the variance in health, but poses an important strain on the respondents due to a large number of surveyquestions. With some prudence, we presume that the explanatory added value of the more extended social capital models is rather limited from a practical point of view as the addition in explained variance of the other models seems not in relation to the number of questions needed. Researchers should weigh up the pros and cons of different manners to measure social capital carefully, taking the goals and focus of their study into account.展开更多
文摘Background: Overcrowding of emergency departments (ED) during out-of-hours health care is a common problem in many Western countries. An appealing alternative for ED’s is the general practices cooperatives (GPC): regional networks of GP’s during the out-of-hours. The aim of this study is to investigate the socio-economic determinants of patients’ choice to opt for one of both health care providers. Methods: We gathered patient level data between May and December 2012 in Flanders (Belgium) from three emergency departments and three general practices cooperatives. Chi square analyses were used in order to study the bivariate relationship between opting for a health care facility (ED or GPC) and various socio-economic factors. To determine the independent association, a logistic regression analysis was conducted. Results: Self-referral to the ED is significantly associated with: being male, being younger, being less educated, having a (lower educated) partner and living in a rural area. Conclusion: The results of this study show that opting for the ED during the out-of-hours is, in general, related to a lower socio-economic status. Therefore the government should focus on patients with a lower socio-economic status when disseminating information on the organisation of health care with an emphasis on the accessibility of the primary health care during out-of-hours. To meet the needs for health care during these out-of-hours, a possible solution could be an integrated facility of GPC and ED with one access to medical care for all patients.
文摘During the last decennia, social capital has been a popular topic in social sciences. However, the concept is often used as a “catch all” for divers social characteristics. Consensus on how the concept should be measured is lacking. This keeps health researchers from drawing firm conclusions on the influence of social capital on health and hampers the decision on which social capital indicators to use in health research. This study compares five ways to operationalise social capital (generalized trust, a social network index, an expanded social network index, bonding, bridging and linking social capital and a multidimensional social capital index) in their ability to explain self-rated health and pain. To evaluate the models’ capacity to explain health, two logistic regression models were built, resulting in Nagelkerke R2 measures. Data were collected in a cross-sectional study in eight neighbourhoods in the region of Ghent (Belgium) by randomly sampling 50 adult inhabitants per neighbourhood. Findings show that the explanation of the observed variance in health by the studied social capital models ranges from 1.9% to 23.1%, but is more pronounced for self-rated health than for pain. The multidimensional social capital index explains most of the variance in health, but poses an important strain on the respondents due to a large number of surveyquestions. With some prudence, we presume that the explanatory added value of the more extended social capital models is rather limited from a practical point of view as the addition in explained variance of the other models seems not in relation to the number of questions needed. Researchers should weigh up the pros and cons of different manners to measure social capital carefully, taking the goals and focus of their study into account.
