Care of patients with selected health problems in fundholding practices in Scotland in 1990 and 1992: needs, process and outcome

Abstract

Background: At the time of the introduction of fundholding, a number of potential benefits and concerns about fundholding were debated.

Aim: A study was undertaken to compare process and outcome of care in patients with different levels of physical, social and psychological need in 1990 and 1992 in six fundholding groups in Scotland.

Method: Patients aged 16 years and over consulting with a range of marker conditions in 1990 and 1992 completed a pre-consultation health status questionnaire asking about physical, social and psychological problems, and a postconsultation satisfaction/enablement questionnaire asking about their ability to cope, and understand their illness. Main outcome measures were consultation length and satisfaction/enablement score.

Results: Of patients attending in the study period, 39% consulted for one or more marker condition. The proportion of patients reporting social problems rose between 1990 and 1992 for 11 out of 12 conditions. Overall, consultation lengths remained constant. Patients wanting to discuss social problems had significantly longer consultations than those reporting no social problems or problems they did not wish to discuss. The proportion of patients expressing enablement dropped for eight conditions and rose for four between 1990 and 1992. The decrease in the proportion expressing enablement remained after controlling for the rise in the percentage reporting social problems. Patients who had social problems they did not wish to discuss but a general health questionnaire score of five or more were the group reporting lowest enablement. Significantly more patients with pain, skin problems and digestive problems reported social problems and significantly fewer of them reported enablement in 1992 compared with 1990. Patients with diabetes, angina, chronic bronchitis and problems seeing fared relatively well over the study period. Some patients with psychosocial problems fared poorly (they had relatively short consultations and were unlikely to express an ability to cope/understand their illness).

Conclusion: The issue of whether benefits to some patient groups from recent health service changes may be matched by disadvantage to other groups, for example those with clinical problems with no financial incentive to provide pro-active care or with psychosocial difficulties, is discussed.