Naslov
ICPC versus Standard PHC Data Analysis in Croatia: What will change?

Autori
Tiljak, Hrvoje ; Kujundžić Tiljak, Mirjana ; Zelić- Havić, Ines ; Nardelli-Kovačić, Magdalena ; Petriček, Goranka

Vrsta, podvrsta i kategorija rada
Sažeci sa skupova, sažetak, znanstveni

Izvornik
WONCA EUROPE 2003 - Book of Abstracts and Conference Programme / Kersnik, Janko ; Keber, Karin ; Švab, Igor ; Rotar-Pavlič, Danica ; Poplas-Susič, Tonka ; Kopčavar-Guček, Nena ; Klančič, Dean - Ljubljana : Združenje zdravnikov združinske medicine - SZD, 2003, 165-165

Skup
WONCA EUROPE 2003 - 9th European Society of General Practice/Family Medicine Regional Conference

Mjesto i datum
Ljubljana, Slovenija, 06.2003

Vrsta sudjelovanja
Poster

Vrsta recenzije
Međunarodna recenzija

Ključne riječi
ICPC, PHC, Data Analysis

Sažetak
Existing data collection, processing ana analysis in primary health care (PHC) seems to be complicated and not suitable for PHC description. The International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) can possibly offer improvement of the data collection and analysis process. Aim: To compare data collected from one family practice unit and presented in two different ways: by use of standard methodology versus ICPC methodology. Design: Retrospective study of data collected in the Utrina Health Centre during 1999. Performed medical procedures and observed morbidity data were analysed. Presentation of data was made according to specifics of compared methodologies. Results: Standard methodology showed 50% of procedures were consultations, clinical consultations and home visits, 1.7% of procedures were preventive diagnostic interventions, 4.5% were therapeutic procedures including prescriptions and injections, 0.2% were expertise consultations, 7, 4% were administrative procedures and 26.15% were other interventions, predominantly referrals. ICPC methodology showed 28, 9% to be attributed to symptoms and complaints ; 5.7% to diagnostics/preventive procedure ; 24.8% to therapy ; 13.8% to test results analysis ; 4.5% to administrative needs, and 18.5% for rest including referrals. Standard methodology showed top-five morbidity rate to be: respiratori diseases (19.9%) ; cardiovascular diseasese (16, 1%) ; psychological problems (11.5%) ; muscle-skeletal disease (8.0%) end skin problems (5.1%). ICPC methodology showed most frequent morbidity: respiratory diseases (20.0%) ; cardiovascular diseases (15.9%) ; psychological problems (9.9%) ; muscle-sceletal disease (9.8%) and general medical problems (9.2%). Standard methodology in contrast to ICPC methodology could not offer link between procedures ana morbiditi. Conclusion: When introducing ICPC methodology in PHC data analysis, some differences should be ecpedted.

Izvorni jezik
Engleski

Znanstvena područja
Javno zdravstvo i zdravstvena zaštita

POVEZANOST RADA