Effectiveness of regional health polyclinics in the state of bahia, brazil
More details
Hide details
1
Institute of Collective Health (Instituto de Saúde Coletiva: ISC), Federal University of Bahia (Universidade Federal da Bahia: UFBA) Associação Brasileira de Pós-Graduação em Saúde Coletiva - Abrasco Brazil
2
Faculty of Economics (Faculdade de Economia), Federal University of Bahia (Universidade Federal da Bahia: UFBa) Brazil
3
Faculty of Economics (Faculdade de Economia), Federal University of Bahia (Universidade Federal da Bahia: UFBa)
4
Institute of Collective Health (Instituto de Saúde Coletiva: ISC), Federal University of Bahia (Universidade Federal da Bahia: UFBA) Brazil
5
Institute of Collective Health (Instituto de Saúde Coletiva: ISC), Federal University of Bahia (Universidade Federal da Bahia: UFBA)
6
Faculty of Medicine (Faculdade de Medicina), Federal University of Bahia (Universidade Federal da Bahia: UFBA) Associação Brasileira de Pós-Graduação em Saúde Coletiva - Abrasco Brazil
7
Faculty of Nursing (Faculdade de Enfermagem), UFBa Brazil
8
Faculty of Economics (Faculdade de Economia), Federal University of Juiz de Fora (Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora: UFJF) Brazil
Publication date: 2023-04-26
Popul. Med. 2023;5(Supplement):A1791
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
In 2017, in order to overcome regional inequalities related to healthcare, Regional Health Polyclinics (_Policlínicas Regionais de Saúde_: PRS) were set up in the state of Bahia. These were principally aimed at filling the gap between Primary and Hospital Healthcare by providing specialized services of medium and high complexity.
Aim:
To assess the effectiveness of the implementation of PRS in 8 health regions in the state of Bahia.
Methods:
An impact assessment of the polyclinics was undertaken using municipal-level health indicators, which were followed over time, from January 2015 to December 2019. Two groups were defined, a border treatment group, which assessed, between 2017 and 2019, municipalities that belong to one of the 8 regional polyclinics and are located at the consortium’s geographical boundary, creating a border with the non-treatment municipalities; and a border control group, containing municipalities that do not belong to any of the polyclinics we assessed, but share a border with those that do. We used Difference-in-Difference and Event-Study approaches to capture the effect of the PRS.
Results:
The PRS were seen to be effective locally. Medium and high complexity care increased by 14.8% and 32.3% respectively within the treatment municipalities compared to the controls. There was also an increase in the number of diagnostic procedures, for example MRI and echocardiography, which increased by an estimated 79.1% and 60% respectively. There was a reduction in urgent admissions (-4.5%, or -14 admissions per quarter), admissions due to preventable causes of death (-3% or -6 admissions per quarter) and their respective filtering for urgent admissions due to diseases with a preventable cause of death (-3.4%, or -5 admissions per quarter).
Conclusion:
The polyclinics we assessed are effective and have had a positive impact on improving access to specialized outpatient care, with consequent reductions in admissions and deaths."