Comparison of patient perceptions of primary care quality across healthcare facilities in Korea: A cross-sectional study

Primary care is not well established in Korea despite its importance in population health. To reinforce the primary care system, understanding the public view of primary care will be essential. We aimed to compare the public perception of primary care qualities across types of healthcare facilities....

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2020-03, Vol.15 (3), p.e0230034-e0230034
Hauptverfasser: Cho, Yongjung, Chung, Heeyoung, Joo, Hyundeok, Park, Hyung Jun, Joh, Hee-Kyung, Kim, Ji Won, Lee, Jong-Koo
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e0230034
container_issue 3
container_start_page e0230034
container_title PloS one
container_volume 15
creator Cho, Yongjung
Chung, Heeyoung
Joo, Hyundeok
Park, Hyung Jun
Joh, Hee-Kyung
Kim, Ji Won
Lee, Jong-Koo
description Primary care is not well established in Korea despite its importance in population health. To reinforce the primary care system, understanding the public view of primary care will be essential. We aimed to compare the public perception of primary care qualities across types of healthcare facilities. We conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey at a university in Seoul, South Korea, from October 2018 to February 2019. Using the Korean Primary Care Assessment Tool (K-PCAT), participants assessed the qualities of primary care services provided by the university health service (a university-based, patient-centered primary care model), community clinics, and hospitals. We compared K-PCAT scores across facilities and evaluated the factors associated with the differences using general linear models. A total of 5,748 responses were analyzed. K-PCAT total scores were highest for the university health service (61.0 ± 15.9) and lowest for hospitals (48.1 ± 14.5), with significant differences between facilities (P < .001). The university health service received the highest scores for first contact, comprehensiveness, personalized care, and family/community orientation; community clinics for continuity of care; and hospitals for care coordination and trust/satisfaction. Primary care facilities were rated higher than hospitals by individuals in good health, with low income levels, using ambulatory care more frequently, and spending less on medical expenses. In conclusion, the user-perceived primary care quality was higher for community-based primary care facilities than hospitals. The highest score was for the university health service, suggesting that setting-based, patient-centered primary care would be an effective model for restructuring the primary care system in Korea.
doi_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0230034
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2375801543</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A616959189</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_47268c7d9d954371b403ebc8282ed035</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A616959189</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-efd9be21ac5d2875a9dbbb6ef904c47393bcfa465acd51bc4808329f3746f4c33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk9uK2zAQhk1p6W7TvkFpBYXSXiTVybK1F4UQeghdWOjpVsjyONHiWF7JLpu3r-J4l7jsRbHAYuabX5rRTJK8JHhBWEY-XLveN7petK6BBaYMY8YfJedEMjoXFLPHJ_uz5FkI1xinLBfiaXLGKElTIuV5crtyu1Z7G1yDXIVa3VloOtSCN9B21jVhMHu7036PjPaAbnpd226PtPEuBLQFXXfbwVNpY6PLQkC2Qd-cB32Blmjg5gHMQU_XKHR9uX-ePKl0HeDF-J8lvz5_-rn6Or-8-rJeLS_nRkjazaEqZQGUaJOWNM9SLcuiKARUEnPDMyZZYSrNRapNmZLC8BznjMqKZVxU3DA2S14fddvaBTUWLSjKsjTHJOUHYn0kSqev1ZiqctqqweD8RmnfWVOD4hkVuclKWcoYmZGCYwaFyWlOocQsjVofx9P6YgelibX0up6ITj2N3aqN-6MyLDiNV58l70YB7256CJ3a2WCgrnUDrh_uLSihLK5Z8uYf9OHsRmqjYwK2qVw81xxE1VIQIVNJchmpxQNU_ErYWRM7rLLRPgl4PwmITAe33Ub3Iaj1j-__z179nrJvT9hjbwVX90MrTkF-BIfu8lDdF5lgdRiQu2qow4CocUBi2KvTB7oPupsI9hflIAzB</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2375801543</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of patient perceptions of primary care quality across healthcare facilities in Korea: A cross-sectional study</title><source>PMC (PubMed Central)</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Cho, Yongjung ; Chung, Heeyoung ; Joo, Hyundeok ; Park, Hyung Jun ; Joh, Hee-Kyung ; Kim, Ji Won ; Lee, Jong-Koo</creator><contributor>Tu, Wen-Jun</contributor><creatorcontrib>Cho, Yongjung ; Chung, Heeyoung ; Joo, Hyundeok ; Park, Hyung Jun ; Joh, Hee-Kyung ; Kim, Ji Won ; Lee, Jong-Koo ; Tu, Wen-Jun</creatorcontrib><description>Primary care is not well established in Korea despite its importance in population health. To reinforce the primary care system, understanding the public view of primary care will be essential. We aimed to compare the public perception of primary care qualities across types of healthcare facilities. We conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey at a university in Seoul, South Korea, from October 2018 to February 2019. Using the Korean Primary Care Assessment Tool (K-PCAT), participants assessed the qualities of primary care services provided by the university health service (a university-based, patient-centered primary care model), community clinics, and hospitals. We compared K-PCAT scores across facilities and evaluated the factors associated with the differences using general linear models. A total of 5,748 responses were analyzed. K-PCAT total scores were highest for the university health service (61.0 ± 15.9) and lowest for hospitals (48.1 ± 14.5), with significant differences between facilities (P &lt; .001). The university health service received the highest scores for first contact, comprehensiveness, personalized care, and family/community orientation; community clinics for continuity of care; and hospitals for care coordination and trust/satisfaction. Primary care facilities were rated higher than hospitals by individuals in good health, with low income levels, using ambulatory care more frequently, and spending less on medical expenses. In conclusion, the user-perceived primary care quality was higher for community-based primary care facilities than hospitals. The highest score was for the university health service, suggesting that setting-based, patient-centered primary care would be an effective model for restructuring the primary care system in Korea.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230034</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32155199</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Ambulatory care ; Chronic illnesses ; Comorbidity ; Comparative analysis ; Cross-sectional studies ; Emergency medical services ; Expenditures ; Health care ; Health care facilities ; Health facilities ; Health insurance ; Health services ; Hospitals ; Medical economics ; Medical schools ; Medical screening ; Medicine ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Patients ; People and Places ; Perceptions ; Population ; Population health ; Primary care ; Public opinion ; Quality ; Service centers ; Setting (Literature) ; Social Sciences ; Sociodemographics ; Student health services ; Surveys</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2020-03, Vol.15 (3), p.e0230034-e0230034</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2020 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2020 Cho et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2020 Cho et al 2020 Cho et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-efd9be21ac5d2875a9dbbb6ef904c47393bcfa465acd51bc4808329f3746f4c33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-efd9be21ac5d2875a9dbbb6ef904c47393bcfa465acd51bc4808329f3746f4c33</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3854-7012 ; 0000-0001-8350-4105 ; 0000-0003-4833-1178</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7064208/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7064208/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2102,2928,23866,27924,27925,53791,53793,79600,79601</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32155199$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Tu, Wen-Jun</contributor><creatorcontrib>Cho, Yongjung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chung, Heeyoung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joo, Hyundeok</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Hyung Jun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joh, Hee-Kyung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Ji Won</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Jong-Koo</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of patient perceptions of primary care quality across healthcare facilities in Korea: A cross-sectional study</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Primary care is not well established in Korea despite its importance in population health. To reinforce the primary care system, understanding the public view of primary care will be essential. We aimed to compare the public perception of primary care qualities across types of healthcare facilities. We conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey at a university in Seoul, South Korea, from October 2018 to February 2019. Using the Korean Primary Care Assessment Tool (K-PCAT), participants assessed the qualities of primary care services provided by the university health service (a university-based, patient-centered primary care model), community clinics, and hospitals. We compared K-PCAT scores across facilities and evaluated the factors associated with the differences using general linear models. A total of 5,748 responses were analyzed. K-PCAT total scores were highest for the university health service (61.0 ± 15.9) and lowest for hospitals (48.1 ± 14.5), with significant differences between facilities (P &lt; .001). The university health service received the highest scores for first contact, comprehensiveness, personalized care, and family/community orientation; community clinics for continuity of care; and hospitals for care coordination and trust/satisfaction. Primary care facilities were rated higher than hospitals by individuals in good health, with low income levels, using ambulatory care more frequently, and spending less on medical expenses. In conclusion, the user-perceived primary care quality was higher for community-based primary care facilities than hospitals. The highest score was for the university health service, suggesting that setting-based, patient-centered primary care would be an effective model for restructuring the primary care system in Korea.</description><subject>Ambulatory care</subject><subject>Chronic illnesses</subject><subject>Comorbidity</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Cross-sectional studies</subject><subject>Emergency medical services</subject><subject>Expenditures</subject><subject>Health care</subject><subject>Health care facilities</subject><subject>Health facilities</subject><subject>Health insurance</subject><subject>Health services</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Medical economics</subject><subject>Medical schools</subject><subject>Medical screening</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>People and Places</subject><subject>Perceptions</subject><subject>Population</subject><subject>Population health</subject><subject>Primary care</subject><subject>Public opinion</subject><subject>Quality</subject><subject>Service centers</subject><subject>Setting (Literature)</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Sociodemographics</subject><subject>Student health services</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk9uK2zAQhk1p6W7TvkFpBYXSXiTVybK1F4UQeghdWOjpVsjyONHiWF7JLpu3r-J4l7jsRbHAYuabX5rRTJK8JHhBWEY-XLveN7petK6BBaYMY8YfJedEMjoXFLPHJ_uz5FkI1xinLBfiaXLGKElTIuV5crtyu1Z7G1yDXIVa3VloOtSCN9B21jVhMHu7036PjPaAbnpd226PtPEuBLQFXXfbwVNpY6PLQkC2Qd-cB32Blmjg5gHMQU_XKHR9uX-ePKl0HeDF-J8lvz5_-rn6Or-8-rJeLS_nRkjazaEqZQGUaJOWNM9SLcuiKARUEnPDMyZZYSrNRapNmZLC8BznjMqKZVxU3DA2S14fddvaBTUWLSjKsjTHJOUHYn0kSqev1ZiqctqqweD8RmnfWVOD4hkVuclKWcoYmZGCYwaFyWlOocQsjVofx9P6YgelibX0up6ITj2N3aqN-6MyLDiNV58l70YB7256CJ3a2WCgrnUDrh_uLSihLK5Z8uYf9OHsRmqjYwK2qVw81xxE1VIQIVNJchmpxQNU_ErYWRM7rLLRPgl4PwmITAe33Ub3Iaj1j-__z179nrJvT9hjbwVX90MrTkF-BIfu8lDdF5lgdRiQu2qow4CocUBi2KvTB7oPupsI9hflIAzB</recordid><startdate>20200310</startdate><enddate>20200310</enddate><creator>Cho, Yongjung</creator><creator>Chung, Heeyoung</creator><creator>Joo, Hyundeok</creator><creator>Park, Hyung Jun</creator><creator>Joh, Hee-Kyung</creator><creator>Kim, Ji Won</creator><creator>Lee, Jong-Koo</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3854-7012</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8350-4105</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4833-1178</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200310</creationdate><title>Comparison of patient perceptions of primary care quality across healthcare facilities in Korea: A cross-sectional study</title><author>Cho, Yongjung ; Chung, Heeyoung ; Joo, Hyundeok ; Park, Hyung Jun ; Joh, Hee-Kyung ; Kim, Ji Won ; Lee, Jong-Koo</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-efd9be21ac5d2875a9dbbb6ef904c47393bcfa465acd51bc4808329f3746f4c33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Ambulatory care</topic><topic>Chronic illnesses</topic><topic>Comorbidity</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Cross-sectional studies</topic><topic>Emergency medical services</topic><topic>Expenditures</topic><topic>Health care</topic><topic>Health care facilities</topic><topic>Health facilities</topic><topic>Health insurance</topic><topic>Health services</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Medical economics</topic><topic>Medical schools</topic><topic>Medical screening</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>People and Places</topic><topic>Perceptions</topic><topic>Population</topic><topic>Population health</topic><topic>Primary care</topic><topic>Public opinion</topic><topic>Quality</topic><topic>Service centers</topic><topic>Setting (Literature)</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Sociodemographics</topic><topic>Student health services</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cho, Yongjung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chung, Heeyoung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joo, Hyundeok</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Hyung Jun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joh, Hee-Kyung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Ji Won</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Jong-Koo</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cho, Yongjung</au><au>Chung, Heeyoung</au><au>Joo, Hyundeok</au><au>Park, Hyung Jun</au><au>Joh, Hee-Kyung</au><au>Kim, Ji Won</au><au>Lee, Jong-Koo</au><au>Tu, Wen-Jun</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of patient perceptions of primary care quality across healthcare facilities in Korea: A cross-sectional study</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2020-03-10</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>e0230034</spage><epage>e0230034</epage><pages>e0230034-e0230034</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Primary care is not well established in Korea despite its importance in population health. To reinforce the primary care system, understanding the public view of primary care will be essential. We aimed to compare the public perception of primary care qualities across types of healthcare facilities. We conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey at a university in Seoul, South Korea, from October 2018 to February 2019. Using the Korean Primary Care Assessment Tool (K-PCAT), participants assessed the qualities of primary care services provided by the university health service (a university-based, patient-centered primary care model), community clinics, and hospitals. We compared K-PCAT scores across facilities and evaluated the factors associated with the differences using general linear models. A total of 5,748 responses were analyzed. K-PCAT total scores were highest for the university health service (61.0 ± 15.9) and lowest for hospitals (48.1 ± 14.5), with significant differences between facilities (P &lt; .001). The university health service received the highest scores for first contact, comprehensiveness, personalized care, and family/community orientation; community clinics for continuity of care; and hospitals for care coordination and trust/satisfaction. Primary care facilities were rated higher than hospitals by individuals in good health, with low income levels, using ambulatory care more frequently, and spending less on medical expenses. In conclusion, the user-perceived primary care quality was higher for community-based primary care facilities than hospitals. The highest score was for the university health service, suggesting that setting-based, patient-centered primary care would be an effective model for restructuring the primary care system in Korea.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>32155199</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0230034</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3854-7012</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8350-4105</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4833-1178</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1932-6203
ispartof PloS one, 2020-03, Vol.15 (3), p.e0230034-e0230034
issn 1932-6203
1932-6203
language eng
recordid cdi_plos_journals_2375801543
source PMC (PubMed Central); DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Ambulatory care
Chronic illnesses
Comorbidity
Comparative analysis
Cross-sectional studies
Emergency medical services
Expenditures
Health care
Health care facilities
Health facilities
Health insurance
Health services
Hospitals
Medical economics
Medical schools
Medical screening
Medicine
Medicine and Health Sciences
Patients
People and Places
Perceptions
Population
Population health
Primary care
Public opinion
Quality
Service centers
Setting (Literature)
Social Sciences
Sociodemographics
Student health services
Surveys
title Comparison of patient perceptions of primary care quality across healthcare facilities in Korea: A cross-sectional study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T22%3A52%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20patient%20perceptions%20of%20primary%20care%20quality%20across%20healthcare%20facilities%20in%20Korea:%20A%20cross-sectional%20study&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Cho,%20Yongjung&rft.date=2020-03-10&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=e0230034&rft.epage=e0230034&rft.pages=e0230034-e0230034&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0230034&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA616959189%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2375801543&rft_id=info:pmid/32155199&rft_galeid=A616959189&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_47268c7d9d954371b403ebc8282ed035&rfr_iscdi=true