RESUMO
ÐACKGROUND: In the last two decades, health care systems (HCS) in the European countries have faced global challenges and have undergone structural changes with the focus on early disease prevention, strengthening primary care, changing the role of hospitals, etc. Russia has inherited the Semashko model from the USSR with dominance of inpatient care, and has been looking for the ways to improve the structure of service delivery. This paper compares the complex of structural changes in the Russian and the European HCS. METHODS: We address major developments in four main areas of medical care delivery: preventive activities, primary care, inpatient care, long-term care. Our focus is on the changes in the organizational structure and activities of health care providers, and in their interaction to improve service delivery. To describe the ongoing changes, we use both qualitative characteristics and quantitative indicators. We extracted the relevant data from the national and international databases and reports and calculated secondary estimates. We also used data from our survey of physicians and interviews with top managers in medical care system. RESULTS: The main trends of structural changes in Russia HCS are similar to the changes in most EU countries. The prevention and the early detection of diseases have developed intensively. The reduction in hospital bed capacity and inpatient care utilization has been accompanied by a decrease in the average length of hospital stay. Russia has followed the European trend of service delivery concentration in hospital-physician complexes, while the increase in the average size of hospitals is even more substantial. However, distinctions in health care delivery organization in Russia are still significant. Changes in primary care are much less pronounced, the system remains hospital centered. Russia lags behind the European leaders in terms of horizontal ties between providers. The reasons for inadequate structural changes are rooted in the governance of service delivery. CONCLUSION: The structural transformations must be intensified with the focus on strengthening primary care, further integration of care, and development of new organizational structures that mitigate the dependence on inpatient care.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: The EQ-5D survey instrument is routinely applied to general and patient specific populations in many countries, as a means of measuring Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) and/or informing Health Technology Assessment. The instrument is the subject of growing interest in the Russian Federation, as too is Health Technology Assessment. This research is the first to systematically present the EQ-5D-3L nationally representative population norms and to examine the socioeconomic and socio-demographic characteristics of the instrument among a representative sample of the Russian population. METHODS: Based on a nationally representative health and well-being survey of the Russian population, conducted in November 2017, we establish the descriptive results, including the EQ-VAS and the EQ-5D Index, by age and gender, examine the correspondence between the EQ-5D health classifications and the separate EQ-VAS scores, and draw on a set of augmented logistic regressions to evaluate the association between the presence of problems in each dimension and various socio-economic and health-related characteristics. RESULTS: We find strong evidence that the EQ-5D instrument is sensitive to underlying observed and latent health experiences, that it mirrors many of the characteristics familiar from other settings but that there are Russian specificities which merit further research, particularly with respect to the anxiety/depression dimension of the instrument. CONCLUSION: This research represents an important landmark for HRQOL studies in Russia as well as for the prospects of continuing to develop the scholarly and practical infrastructure necessary for Russian Health Technology Assessment to advance.
