Citizens’ Send Messages to Policy Makers Related to Primary Healthcare Practices: First Results From the Implementation of the Patient-Reported Indicator Surveys PaRIS in Greece
Author(s)
Olga Siskou, PhD1, Olympia Konstantakopoulou, PhD2, Peter Galanis, PhD1, Lilian Vildiridi, MSc3, Vasileios Kontozamanis, MSc4, Konstantinos Mathioudakis, Bachelor5, Anastasios Tsolakidis, Bachelor6, Eleftherios Thiraios, PhD7, Aggeliki Karaiskou, MSc8, Aggeliki Bilali, PhD9, Georgia Kolliopoulou, MSc10, Dimitra Topka, MSc10, Efstathia Alevizou, MSc10, Michael Van den Berg, PhD11, Marta Ballester Santiago, MSc12, Pili Illarramendi Charovsky, MSc12, Maria Kosmitou, Bachelor13, Dimitra-Maria Angelopoulou, Student at NKUA1, Dafni Kaitelidou, PhD14.
1Center For Health Services Management and Evaluation Nursing Department UoA, Athens, Greece, 2Department of Nursing, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece, 3Ministry of Health, Athens, Greece, 4Vassilis Kontozamanis & Co, Chalandri, Greece, 5e-Government Center for Social Security-IDIKA SA, Athens, Greece, 6IDIKA SA - e-Government Center for Social Security Services, Athens, Greece, 7Athens Medical Society, Athens, Greece, 8National Agency for Quality Assurance in Health SA -ODIPY SA, Athens, Greece, 9National Agency for Quality Assurance in Health SA -ODIPY SA,, Athens, Greece, 10National Agency for Quality Assurance in Health SA, Athens, Greece, 11Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France, 12Institut Universitari Avedis Donabedian, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Fundació Avedis Donabedian, Barcelona, Spain, 13Center for Health Services Management and Evaluation Nursing Department UoA, Athens, Greece, 14National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
1Center For Health Services Management and Evaluation Nursing Department UoA, Athens, Greece, 2Department of Nursing, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece, 3Ministry of Health, Athens, Greece, 4Vassilis Kontozamanis & Co, Chalandri, Greece, 5e-Government Center for Social Security-IDIKA SA, Athens, Greece, 6IDIKA SA - e-Government Center for Social Security Services, Athens, Greece, 7Athens Medical Society, Athens, Greece, 8National Agency for Quality Assurance in Health SA -ODIPY SA, Athens, Greece, 9National Agency for Quality Assurance in Health SA -ODIPY SA,, Athens, Greece, 10National Agency for Quality Assurance in Health SA, Athens, Greece, 11Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France, 12Institut Universitari Avedis Donabedian, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Fundació Avedis Donabedian, Barcelona, Spain, 13Center for Health Services Management and Evaluation Nursing Department UoA, Athens, Greece, 14National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
OBJECTIVES: To present the first results of PaRIS in Greece (PaRIS-Greece), related to patients’ reported outcomes and experiences from Primary Healthcare Practices.
METHODS: Study populations were defined as primary care practices and patients of 45 years old and over, who had a contact with the primary care practice in the past six months. A set of common electronic questionnaires were developed by an international consortium (composed of experts under the leadership of the OECD) and validated and tested in each country prior to the implementation of the main survey. IDIKA, the public IT company for Social Security in Greece, contacted participants via the system of intangible prescription. 294 Greek providers and nearly 30,000 Greek citizens were invited to participate. Of these, 104 providers (response rate: 35.4%) and 2,218 patients (response rate: 7.4%) fully completed the questionnaire.
RESULTS: Among the 2,218 patients (44.1% males, 64.3% suffering from chronic conditions), 75% rated the care they received as good to excellent, while 56% reported that the care was organized in a way that fully or largely served their needs. However, 45% indicated that they often had to repeat information that should have been already in their medical record. Bivariate analysis revealed that individuals with low income (Spearman’s p= -0.14, p-value <0.001) and those with worse physical health (Spearman’s p= -0.15, p-value <0.001) and worse mental health (Spearman’s p = -0.12, p-value <0.001) more frequently reported experiencing an adverse incident in the healthcare practice, such as misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis and/or treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Citizens with a 'more vulnerable profile' seem to report more negative healthcare experiences and health outcomes and therefore warrant special attention from policymakers.. Patients’ experiences constitute an important tool for assessing the quality of care provided, and consequently for designing an accessible and person-centered system, responsive to the needs of the population.
METHODS: Study populations were defined as primary care practices and patients of 45 years old and over, who had a contact with the primary care practice in the past six months. A set of common electronic questionnaires were developed by an international consortium (composed of experts under the leadership of the OECD) and validated and tested in each country prior to the implementation of the main survey. IDIKA, the public IT company for Social Security in Greece, contacted participants via the system of intangible prescription. 294 Greek providers and nearly 30,000 Greek citizens were invited to participate. Of these, 104 providers (response rate: 35.4%) and 2,218 patients (response rate: 7.4%) fully completed the questionnaire.
RESULTS: Among the 2,218 patients (44.1% males, 64.3% suffering from chronic conditions), 75% rated the care they received as good to excellent, while 56% reported that the care was organized in a way that fully or largely served their needs. However, 45% indicated that they often had to repeat information that should have been already in their medical record. Bivariate analysis revealed that individuals with low income (Spearman’s p= -0.14, p-value <0.001) and those with worse physical health (Spearman’s p= -0.15, p-value <0.001) and worse mental health (Spearman’s p = -0.12, p-value <0.001) more frequently reported experiencing an adverse incident in the healthcare practice, such as misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis and/or treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Citizens with a 'more vulnerable profile' seem to report more negative healthcare experiences and health outcomes and therefore warrant special attention from policymakers.. Patients’ experiences constitute an important tool for assessing the quality of care provided, and consequently for designing an accessible and person-centered system, responsive to the needs of the population.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-11, ISPOR Europe 2025, Glasgow, Scotland
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S2
Code
HPR44
Topic
Health Policy & Regulatory, Health Service Delivery & Process of Care, Patient-Centered Research
Topic Subcategory
Health Disparities & Equity