Abstract Background: Many countries in Europe have implemented managed competition and patient choice during the last decade. With the introduction of managed competition, health insurers also became an important stakeholder. They purchase services on behalf of their customers and are allowed to contract healthcare providers selectively. It has, therefore, become increasingly important to take one's insurance into account when choosing a provider. There is little evidence that patients make active choices in the way that policymakers assume they do. This research aims to investigate, firstly, the role of patients in choosing a healthcare provider at the point of referral, then the role of the GP and, finally, the influence of the health insurer/insurance policies within this process. Methods: We videotaped a series of everyday consultations between Dutch GPs and their patients during 2015 and 2016. In 117 of these consultations, with 28 GPs, the patient was referred to another healthcare provider. These consultations were coded by three observers using an observation protocol which assessed the role of the patient, GP, and the influence of the health insurer during the referral. Results: Patients were divided into three groups: patients with little or no input, patients with some input, and those with a lot of input. Just over half of the patients (56%) seemed to have some, or a lot of, input into the choice of a healthcare provider at the point of referral by their GP. In addition, in almost half of the consultations (47%), GPs inquired about their patients' preferences regarding a healthcare provider. Topics regarding the health insurance or insurance policy of a patient were rarely (14%) discussed at the point of referral. Conclusions: Just over half of the patients appear to have some, or a lot of, input into their choice of a healthcare provider at the point of referral by their GP. However, the remainder of the patients had little or no input. If more patient choice continues to be an important aim for policy makers, patients should be encouraged to actively choose the healthcare provider who best fits their needs and preferences.
Purpose To empirically define the concept of burden of neck pain. The lack of a clear understanding of this construct from the perspective of persons with neck pain and care providers hampers adequate measurement of this burden. An additional aim was to compare the conceptual model obtained with the frequently used Neck Disability Index (NDI). Methods Concept mapping, combining qualitative (nominal group technique and group consensus) and quantitative research methods (cluster analysis and multidimensional scaling), was applied to groups of persons with neck pain (n = 3) and professionals treating persons with neck pain (n = 2). Group members generated statements, which were organized into concept maps. Group members achieved consensus about the number and description of domains and the researchers then generated an overall mind map covering the full breadth of the burden of neck pain. Results Concept mapping revealed 12 domains of burden of neck pain: impaired mobility neck, neck pain, fatigue/concentration, physical complaints, psychological aspects/consequences, activities of daily living, social participation, financial consequences, difficult to treat/difficult to diagnose, difference of opinion with care providers, incomprehension by social environment, and how person with neck pain deal with complaints. All ten items of the NDI could be linked to the mind map, but the NDI measures only part of the burden of neck pain. Conclusion This study revealed the relevant domains for the burden of neck pain from the viewpoints of persons with neck pain and their care providers. These results can guide the identification of existing measurements instruments for each domain or the development of new ones to measure the burden of neck pain.
English: This living lab aims to support the creation, development and implementation of next generation concepts for sustainable healthcare logistics, with special attention for last mile solutions. Dutch healthcare providers are on the verge of a transition towards (more) sustainable business models, spurred by e.g., increasing healthcare costs, ongoing budget cuts, tight labor market conditions and increasing ecological awareness. Consequently, healthcare providers need to improve and innovate their business model and underlying logistics concept(s). Simultaneously, many cities are struggling with congestion in traffic, air quality and liveability in general. This calls for Last Mile Logistics (LML) concepts that can address challenges like effective and efficient resource planning, scheduling and utilization and, particularly, sustainability goals. LML can reduce environmental and social impact by decreasing emissions, congestion and pollution through effectively consolidating in-flows of goods and providing innovative solutions for care, wellbeing and related services. The research and initiatives in the living lab will address the following challenges: reducing the ecological footprint, reducing (healthcare-related) costs, improving service quality, decreasing loneliness of frail citizens and improving the livability of urban areas (reducing congestion and emissions). Given the scarcity and fragmentation of knowledge on healthcare logistics in organizations the living lab will also act as a learning community for (future) healthcare- and logistics professionals, thereby supporting the development of human capital. By working closely with related stakeholders and using a transdisciplinary research approach it is ensured that the developed knowledge and solutions deliver a contribution to societal challenges and have sound business potential.
English: This living lab aims to support the creation, development and implementation of next generation concepts for sustainable healthcare logistics, with special attention for last mile solutions. Dutch healthcare providers are on the verge of a transition towards (more) sustainable business models, spurred by e.g., increasing healthcare costs, ongoing budget cuts, tight labor market conditions and increasing ecological awareness. Consequently, healthcare providers need to improve and innovate their business model and underlying logistics concept(s). Simultaneously, many cities are struggling with congestion in traffic, air quality and liveability in general. This calls for Last Mile Logistics (LML) concepts that can address challenges like effective and efficient resource planning, scheduling and utilization and, particularly, sustainability goals. LML can reduce environmental and social impact by decreasing emissions, congestion and pollution through effectively consolidating in-flows of goods and providing innovative solutions for care, wellbeing and related services. The research and initiatives in the living lab will address the following challenges: reducing the ecological footprint, reducing (healthcare-related) costs, improving service quality, decreasing loneliness of frail citizens and improving the livability of urban areas (reducing congestion and emissions). Given the scarcity and fragmentation of knowledge on healthcare logistics in organizations the living lab will also act as a learning community for (future) healthcare- and logistics professionals, thereby supporting the development of human capital. By working closely with related stakeholders and using a transdisciplinary research approach it is ensured that the developed knowledge and solutions deliver a contribution to societal challenges and have sound business potential.
