Türkiye’de Aile Hekimlerinin İş Yükü Ve Hizmet Analizi: Bir Günlük Fotoğraf

Abstract

Amaç:Bu çalışma, Türkiye'de birinci basamakta çalışan aile hekimlerinin günlük iş yükünü belirlemeyi, iş yükünün içeriğini analiz etmeyi ve hizmet profilinitanımlamayı amaçlamaktadır.Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışma tasarımı tanımlayıcı ve kesitseldir. Çalışmaya 17 farklı şehirden toplam 28 aile hekimi dahil edilmiştir. Biri aile hekimlerinin demografik özelliklerini, diğeri ise iş yüklerini 43 maddede tüm yönleri ile sorgulayan iki anket katılımcılar tarafından doldurulmuştur.Bulgular: İlgili gün içerisinde toplam 1215 muayene kaydı bildirildi. Katılan aile hekimlerinin günlük ortalama iş yükü 45,7 ± 16,8 muayenedir. Tüm hastaların% 92,5'i aile hekimlerinin kendi kayıtlı hastalarıyken % 7,5'i misafirdir. Toplam 1610 başvuru sebebi rapor edilmiştir. Bunlar reçete talepleri (451, % 28), klinik şikayetler (447, % 27.8), koruyucu hekimlik hizmetleri (436, % 27), idari nedenler (161, % 10) ve diğer nedenler (115, % 7.2)olarak sınıflandırılmıştır. Esansiyel hipertansiyon ve kas-iskelet sistemi hastalıkları reçete taleplerinde en sık görülen tanılardır. Boğaz ağrısı ve öksürük en sık görülen iki klinik şikayettir.Sonuç: Türkiye'deki aile hekimleri iş yükü açısından ciddi baskı altındadır. Reçete talepleri bu iş yükünün önemli bir yüzdesini oluşturmaktadır. Bu yükü azaltmak için önlemler alınmalıdır

Keywords

• Birinci basamak sağlık hizmeti
• Aile hekimi
• İş yükü

Daily Workload And Service Profile Of Family Physicians In Turkey: A Snapshot Of One-Day Work

Abstract

Objective: The study aims to determine the daily workload and to analyze the content of workload, to describe the service profile of FPs working in primary care in Turkey. Methods: The study design is descriptive and cross-sectional. A total of 28 FPs from 17 different cities were enrolled into the study. Two surveys, one inquiring the demographic properties of FPs participated and a second encounter form with 43 items inquiring all aspects of FPs’ workload were filled by the participants. Results: A total of 1,215 visits were reported. The average daily workload of FPs participating was 45.7± 16.8 visits. 92.5% of all patients were family physicians’ own registered patients while 7.5% of them were guests. A total of 1,610 RFEs were reported. We categorized them as prescription requests (451, 28%), clinical complaints (447, 27.8%), preventive medicine services (436, 27%), administrative reasons (161, %10) and other reasons (115, 7.2%). Essential hypertension and diseases of musculoskeletal system were the most common diagnoses in prescription requests. Sore throat and cough were the top two clinical complaints. Conclusions: FPs in Turkey are under severe pressure. Prescription requests account for an important percentage of this workload. Measures should be taken to lessen this burden.

Keywords

• Primary health care
• Family physician
• Workload

References

1. 1. Turkish Ministry of Health.Health statistics yearbook 2013. Available from: http://ekutuphane.sagem.gov.tr/kitaplar/t.c._saglik_bakanligi_saglik_istatistikleri_yilligi_2013.pdf [Last accessed on May 2015].
2. 2. Kringos DS, Boerma GW, Spaan E, Pellny M. A snapshot of the organization and provision of primary care in Turkey. BMC Health Services Research 2011;11:90.
3. 3. Masseria C, Irwin R, Thomson S, Gemmill M, Mossialos E. Primary Care in Europe (policy brief) 2009, 20 – 24. Available from: ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=4739&langId=en
4. 4. Tay Z, Tuncal AN, Atasoylu G, Sertel M, Köroğlu G. Assessment Workload Of Family Physicians And Human Capacıty In Manisa Provınce In 2011. Türk Aile Hek Derg. 2014; 18(1):5-15.
5. 5. Şensoy N, Başak O, Gemalmaz A. Family medicine practice and patient profile in Umurlu the center of family medicine: To what extent it Meets. The Medical Journal of Kocatepe 2009;10:49-56.
6. 6. Topallı R, Aladağ N, Filiz TM, Topsever P, Ciğerli Ö, Görpelioğlu S. Tıp fakültesi aile hekimliği polikliniklerinin sağlık hizmeti sunumundaki yeri: Değirmendere deneyimi. Türk Aile Hek Derg 2003;7:165-170.
7. 7. World Health Organization. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision. Available from: http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd10/browse/2015/en
8. 8. World Health Organization. The Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification System with Defined Daily Doses (ATC/DDD). Available from: http://www.who.int/classifications/atcddd/en/

9. 9. Health and Social Care Information Center, General practice trends in the UK, 23 January 2013. Available from: http://www.hscic.gov.uk/media/15448/General-Practice-Trends-in-the-UK-to-2013/pdf/gen-prac-trends-2013.pdf
10. 10. U.S. Department of Health & Human Service. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.Primary Care Workforce Facts and Stats No. 1. Available from: http://www.ahrq.gov/research/findings/factsheets/primary/pcwork1/index.html
11. 11. Van den Berg MJ, Kringos DS, Marks LK, Klazinga NS. The Dutch health care performance report: seven years of health care performance assessment in the Netherlands. Health Research Policy and Systems 2014;12:1.
12. 12. Selçuk Mungan S. The Implementation Family Practice in Turkey-Current State.Presentation at the Ankara Family Medicine Specialty Training Meeting of the Ministry of Health. December 30th, 2013. Ankara, Turkey.
13. 13. de Silva N, Mendis K. One-day general practice morbidity survey in Sri Lanka. FamPract. 1998 Aug;15(4):323-31.
14. 14. Mimi O, Tong SF, Nordin S, Teng CL, Khoo EM, Abdul-Rahman A, et al. A comparison of morbidity patterns in public and private primary care clinics in Malaysia. Malaysian Family Physician 2011;6(1):19-25
15. 15. Turkish Statistical Institute. Death Statistics, 2013. Available from: http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=16050
16. 16. World Health Organization. Worl health Statistics, 2013. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/81965/1/9789241564588_eng.pdf?ua=1
17. 17. Emmanuel SC, Phua HP, Cheong PY. 2001 survey on primary medical care in Singapore. Singapore Med J. 2004 May;45(5):199-213.