title: What is important in evaluating health care quality? An international comparison of user views.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Quality of care from the perspective of users is increasingly used in evaluating health care performance. Going beyond satisfaction studies, quality of care from the users' perspective is conceptualised in two dimensions: the importance users attach to aspects of care and their actual experience with these aspects. It is well established that health care systems differ in performance. The question in this article is whether there are also differences in what people in different health care systems view as important aspects of health care quality. The aim is to describe and explain international differences in the importance that health care users attach to different aspects of health care.
  
  
  METHODS
  Data were used from different studies that all used a version of the QUOTE-questionnaire that measures user views of health care quality in two dimensions: the importance that users attach to aspects of care and their actual experience. Data from 12 European countries and 5133 individuals were used. They were analysed using multi-level analysis.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Although most of the variations in importance people attach to aspects of health care is located at the individual level, there are also differences between countries. The ranking of aspects shows similarities. 'My GP should always take me seriously' was in nearly all countries ranked first, while an item about waiting time in the GP's office was always ranked lowest.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Differences between countries in how health care users value different aspects of care are difficult to explain. Further theorising should take into account that importance and performance ratings are positively related, that people compare their experiences with those of others, and that general and instrumental values might be related through the institutions of the health care system.
authors.affiliation: NIVEL, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, PO Box 1568, 3500 BN, The Netherlands. p.groenewegen@nivel.nl
authors.forename: Peter P
authors.initials: PP
authors.lastname: Groenewegen
authors.forename: Jan J
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: Kerssens
authors.forename: Herman J
authors.initials: HJ
authors.lastname: Sixma
authors.forename: Ingrid
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: van der Eijk
authors.forename: Wienke G W
authors.initials: WG
authors.lastname: Boerma
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D003431:Cross-Cultural Comparison; D005060:Europe; D006801:Humans; D038622:Internationality; D010342:Patient Acceptance of Health Care / Q000208:ethnology* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D017060:Patient Satisfaction / Q000208:ethnology / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D010817:Physician-Patient Relations; D019984:Quality Indicators, Health Care / Q000145:classification*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012945:Social Values / Q000208:ethnology*; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
references.citation: Fam Pract. 1999 Feb;16(1):4-11
references.pmid: 10321388
references.citation: Health Expect. 1998 Nov;1(2):82-95
references.pmid: 11281863
references.citation: Health Aff (Millwood). 2001 May-Jun;20(3):244-52
references.pmid: 11585173
references.citation: Am J Gastroenterol. 2001 Dec;96(12):3329-36
references.pmid: 11774945
references.citation: Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2002 May;(542):1-6
references.pmid: 12026937
references.citation: Bull World Health Organ. 2004 Feb;82(2):106-14
references.pmid: 15042232
references.citation: J Clin Epidemiol. 2004 Aug;57(8):785-94
references.pmid: 15485730
references.citation: Health Aff (Millwood). 1990 Summer;9(2):185-92
references.pmid: 2365256
references.citation: Med Care. 1988 Apr;26(4):383-92
references.pmid: 3352331
references.citation: Soc Sci Med A. 1981 Sep;15(5):557-64
references.pmid: 6976620
references.citation: J Asthma. 1997;34(6):531-8
references.pmid: 9428299