Table 5.
Concept | Number of Studies | Outcome/Indicator | Type (Private) | Countries | Impact |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Affordable | 8 | SES of patients (eg, employment status, residents from deprived versus affluent region) | Private (ie, maternity, psychiatric), ISTCs | Italy, United Kingdom, Greece, Spain | Public hospitals perform better |
2 | Method of payment (ie, private health insurance and pay out‐of‐pocket) | Private | Greece | ||
1 | Payment per discharge | FP | Greece | ||
Physical | 3 | Case‐mix differences (eg, cream skimming) | FP, ISTCs | Italy, UK | |
1 | Access to specialty care (ie, adjusted rates of revascularization) | Private | France | ||
1 | Admission pattern | Private psychiatric | Italy | ||
1 | Access to preemptive registration | FP | France | ||
1 | Regional physical mobility (number of nonresident patients in the region admitted) | Private | Italy |
Physical | 1 | Mean expenditure and usage of drugs | FP | France | No difference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Affordable | 1 | Access to specialty care (ie, ambulatory care services) | Private | France | Private hospitals perform better |
1 | Method of payment (ie, informal payment) | Private | Greece | ||
Physical | 1 | Chance op follow‐up treatment | Private psychiatric | Italy | |
Timely | 1 | Waiting times | ISTCs | UK |
Abbreviations: ISTCs, independent sector treatment centers; FP, for‐profit; SES, socioeconomic status.