IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0241311.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Primary care quality in Vietnam: Perceptions and opinions of primary care physicians in commune health centers – a mixed-methods study

Author

Listed:
  • Nguyen Thi Hoa
  • Anselme Derese
  • Wim Peersman
  • Jeffrey F Markuns
  • Sara Willems
  • Nguyen Minh Tam

Abstract

Introduction: Measuring the performance of a primary care system is one of the very first steps to find out whether there is room for improvement. To obtain an objective and comprehensive view, this measurement should come from both the supply and demand sides of the system. Patients’ experiences of primary care have been studied around the world, but much less energy has been invested in researching providers’ perspectives. This research aims to explore how primary care physicians working at commune health centers in Vietnam evaluate their performance and their opinions on how to improve the quality of primary care services. Materials and methods: First, a quantitative study was conducted using the validated Vietnamese PCAT questionnaire—provider expanded version (VN PCAT PE) targeting all primary care physicians (PCPs) working at commune health centers in a province of Central Vietnam. Next, a qualitative study was carried out, consisting of in-depth interviews with PCPs, to better understand the results of the quantitative survey and gain insight on barriers of primary care services and how to overcome them. Results: In the quantitative portion of our study, 150 PCPs rated the quality of ongoing care and first contact in CHCs as the best (3.09 and 3.11 out of 4, respectively), and coordination as the worst performing core domain (2.53). Twenty-two PCPs also participated in our qualitative research. In regards to challenges that primary care physicians face during their daily practice, three central themes emerged: 1) patient factors such as client attitude and knowledge, 2) provider factors such as the burden of administrative work and lack of training opportunities, and 3) contextual factors such as low income and lack of resources including medicines and diagnostics. Participants recommended more health promotion campaigns in the media, increasing the number of services available at CHCs (such as being able to take blood samples), reducing the workload related to administration for CHC leaders, greater government subsidies, and providing more training courses for PCPs. Conclusions: Findings from this study offer a valuable view from the supply-side of the primary care system, specifically those who directly deliver primary care services. Along with the earlier study on consumers’ evaluation of the Vietnamese primary care system, and literature from other low and middle-income countries, these findings offer emerging evidence for policymakers to improve the quality of primary care in Vietnam.

Suggested Citation

  • Nguyen Thi Hoa & Anselme Derese & Wim Peersman & Jeffrey F Markuns & Sara Willems & Nguyen Minh Tam, 2020. "Primary care quality in Vietnam: Perceptions and opinions of primary care physicians in commune health centers – a mixed-methods study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-16, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0241311
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241311
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0241311
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0241311&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0241311?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0241311. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.