Download the report (150 p.) - KCE

More documents

Recommendations

Info

110 Making General Practice Attractive: Encouraging GP attraction and Retention KCE Reports 90 Criteria Table 20: Criteria weight by group type: mean value (n=102). Stakeholder Group Policy GP maker Unions University Media All Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Criteria from the societal perspective: Attractiveness 85.6 80.3 80.4 87.9 89.3 83.7 Cost-benefit for the society 70.0 84.0 74.2 77.7 82.9 76.8 Acceptance 50.2 51.1 59.8 62.3 48.4 54.1 Accessibility of care 72.4 79.1 76.8 77.0 80.0 76.4 Criteria from the GP perspective: Quality of life 89.8 87.8 83.3 84.3 79.3 86.3 Income 77.2 77.8 70.3 74.9 72.9 75.3 Autonomy in the work 79.5 63.3 77.8 60.4 78.6 71.8 Clinical interest 82.9 77.4 78.5 87.7 82.1 81.2 Team-working 78.3 68.9 72.5 69.6 67.9 72.5 Work environment 77.2 76.3 74.8 71.4 67.9 74.9 Power of the GP 52.9 53.0 56.6 49.6 61.7 53.7 Figure 9: Societal criteria rated by stakeholders groups: radar.
KCE Reports 90 Making General Practice Attractive: Encouraging GP attraction and Retention 111 Figure 10: GPs’ criteria rated by stakeholders groups: radar. 6.7.3.2 The conditional logit results All criteria had the expected positive sign indicating that the higher the value of the criterion, the higher the probability of choosing a specific policy option. However, in seven out of 16 cases the coefficients were not significant at the 95% level (table 21). Attractiveness had, in all topics, the highest value, indicating that the choice of the policy was mainly driven by its impact on attracting, recruiting and retaining GPs in the family practice career. The cost-benefit to the society came in second place and is not significant for organization topic, with a coefficient ranging from a high 0.57 for teaching policies to a low 0.13 for health system organization. Access was significant only for work life balance policies and had a borderline significance for teaching and organization. Acceptance by the other professionals was significant only for work-life balance policies. There are two reasons why acceptance had mostly no influence on the choice. First the averaged score of the acceptance criteria had very often a value around the score of 4 (indicating no-effect) more often than the other criteria (see appendix 5.8). This suggests that stakeholders thought that such policy had very little impact on the other professions so that acceptance was not a big problem. The second reason had to do with the weight given to the acceptance by the other health professionals: as the previous analysis has shown, acceptance (weight of 54) was given a much lower weight than the other criteria (attractiveness had a weight of 84).
Page 1 and 2:
Making general practice attractive:
Page 3 and 4:
Making general practice attractive:
Page 5:
Layout : Wim Van Moer Brussels, 27t
Page 8 and 9:
ii Making General Practice Attracti
Page 10 and 11:
iv Making General Practice Attracti
Page 12 and 13:
vi Making General Practice Attracti
Page 14 and 15:
2 Making General Practice Attractiv
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
10 Making General Practice Attracti
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73: 60 Making General Practice Attracti
Page 112 and 113: 100 Making General Practice Attract
Page 148 and 149: Registration of copyright : D/2008/
show all

Download the report (150 p.) - KCE

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?