Table 4.
Country | Annual income 2000 | Number of patients per GP1) | Income per patient | Working hours2) | Income per hour | GP-density |
Germany | 96,325 | 937 | 102.75 | 60 | 31.03 | 1.1 |
Denmark | 85,362 | 1311 | 65.11 | 43 | 38.53 | 0.9 |
UK | 80,580 | 1600 | 50.37 | 58 | 26.72 | 0.6 |
Netherlands | 65,842 | 2529 | 26.03 | 44 | 28.78 | 0.5 |
Sweden | 54,124 | 1898 | 28.52 | 38 | 27.18 | 0.5 |
France | 53,889 | 622 | 81.40 | 56 | 18.44 | 1.6 |
Finland | 47,213 | 1384 | 34.11 | 38 | 23.89 | 0.7 |
Belgium | 25,602 | 860 | 29.77 | 40 | 12.31 | 2.1 |
1) For Belgium, Denmark and the Netherlands, the number of patients per GP is based on the figures for a full-time GP as used in this study; for the other countries, the figures are derived from the OECD health data files 2006.
2) Working hours per week. For Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK the figures are based on data collected in this study. For the UK, the figure includes being on-call [26]. For Finland and Sweden, the figures are based on the rather old study of Boerma (data collection in 1993) [27].
3) The remuneration of GPs in the Netherlands is a combination of a capitation fee for the publicly insured patients (about 2/3 of the annual revenues) and a fee-for-service for the privately insured patients (about 1/3 of the total revenues). Since the share of fee-for-service is substantial, we characterized the Netherlands as a fee-for-service country.