What is important in evaluating health care quality? An international comparison of user views

• Published in: BMC health services research Vol. 5; no. 1; p. 16
• Main Authors: Groenewegen, Peter P, Kerssens, Jan J, Sixma, Herman J, van der Eijk, Ingrid, Boerma, Wienke G W
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BioMed Central Ltd 21-02-2005; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: Adult; Cross-Cultural Comparison; Europe; Humans; Internationality; Patient Acceptance of Health Care - ethnology; Patient Acceptance of Health Care - statistics & numerical data; Patient Satisfaction - ethnology; Patient Satisfaction - statistics & numerical data; Physician-Patient Relations; Quality Indicators, Health Care - classification; Reproducibility of Results; Social Values - ethnology; Surveys and Questionnaires; Europe
• ISSN: 1472-6963; 1472-6963
• DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-5-16

Quality of care from the perspective of users is increasingly used in evaluating health care performance. Going beyond satisfaction studies, quality of care from the users' perspective is conceptualised in two dimensions: the importance users attach to aspects of care and their actual experience with these aspects. It is well established that health care systems differ in performance. The question in this article is whether there are also differences in what people in different health care systems view as important aspects of health care quality. The aim is to describe and explain international differences in the importance that health care users attach to different aspects of health care.
Data were used from different studies that all used a version of the QUOTE-questionnaire that measures user views of health care quality in two dimensions: the importance that users attach to aspects of care and their actual experience. Data from 12 European countries and 5133 individuals were used. They were analysed using multi-level analysis.
Although most of the variations in importance people attach to aspects of health care is located at the individual level, there are also differences between countries. The ranking of aspects shows similarities. 'My GP should always take me seriously' was in nearly all countries ranked first, while an item about waiting time in the GP's office was always ranked lowest.
Differences between countries in how health care users value different aspects of care are difficult to explain. Further theorising should take into account that importance and performance ratings are positively related, that people compare their experiences with those of others, and that general and instrumental values might be related through the institutions of the health care system.