Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25421631›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2014

The introduction of Greek Central Health Fund: Has the reform met its goal in the sector of Primary Health Care or is there a new model needed?

Nikos Polyzos, Stefanos Karakolias, Costas Dikeos, Mamas Theodorou, Catherine Kastanioti, Kalomira Mama, Periklis Polizoidis, Christoforos Skamnakis, Charalampos Tsairidis, Eleutherios Thireos

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Primary Care Doctors' Assessment of and Preferences on Their Remuneration.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing · 2017
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Nikos Polyzos
Stefanos Karakolias
Costas Dikeos
Mamas Theodorou
Catherine Kastanioti
Kalomira Mama
Periklis Polizoidis
Christoforos Skamnakis
Charalampos Tsairidis
Eleutherios Thireos
Democritus University of Thrace · GROpen University of Cyprus · CYTechnological Educational Institute of Peloponnese · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe National Organization for Healthcare Provision (EOPYY) originates from the recent reform in Greek healthcare, aiming amidst economic predicament, at the rationalization of health expenditure and reactivation of the pivotal role of Primary Health Care (PHC). Health funding (public/private) mix is examined, alongside the role of pre-existing health insurance funds. The main pursuit of this paper is to evaluate whether EOPYY has met its goals.

methodsThe article surveys for best practices in advanced health systems and similar sickness funds. The main benchmarks focus on PHC provision and providers' reimbursement. It then turns to an analysis of EOPYY, focusing on specific questions and searching the relevant databases. It compares the best practice examples to the EOPYY (alongside further developments set by new legislation in L 4238/14), revealing weaknesses relevant to non-integrated PHC network, unbalanced manpower, non-gatekeeping, under-financing and other funding problems caused by the current crisis. Finally, a new model of medical procedures cost accounting was tested in health centers.

resultsAn alternative operation of EOPYY functioning primarily as an insurer whereas its proprietary units are integrated with these of the NHS is proposed. The paper claims it is critical to revise the current induced demand favorable reimbursement system, via per capita payments for physicians combined with extra pay-for-performance payments, while cost accounting corroborates a prospective system for NHS's and EOPYY's units, under a combination of global budgets and Ambulatory Patient Groups (APGs)

conclusionsSelf-critical points on the limitations of results due to lack of adequate data (not) given by EOPYY are initially raised. Then the issue concerning the debate between 'copying' benchmarks and 'a la cart' selectively adopting and adapting best practices from wider experience is discussed, with preference to the latter. The idea of an 'a la cart' choice of international examples is proposed. The 'results' discussing EOPYY's dual function and induced-demand favorable reimbursement system are further critically examined. International experience shows evidence of effective alternatives, such as per capita and pay-for-performance payments for practicing doctors as well as per case reimbursement for health centers under global budget principles.

Indexed as

Healthcare FinancingHealth Care ReformFinancial ManagementGoalsHealth ExpendituresHumansInsurance, HealthPrimary Health CarePrivate SectorProspective StudiesPublic SectorReimbursement, Incentive

Identifiers

PMID25421631
PMCPMC4255662
OpenAlexW2127576395

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.