Quality and availability of health care for patients with cardiovascular diseases. Results of sociological research

Aim. Based on the results of a sociological survey of patients, to assess quality and availability of health care for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) in 2020-2021 in the Russian Federation.

Material and methods. In August-September 2021, 5159 patients with CVDs from 76 Russian regions were interviewed. Questionnaire (Google form) assessed the change in health care provision over the past two years, the availability of medicine provision, the prevalence and reasons for discontinuation of treatment, as well as the difficulties faced by patients.

Results. Improvement in health care provision were assessed by 47,6% of the surveyed patients with CVD, worsening — by 16,6%, and 23,7% did not noted any changes. Improvements regarded diagnosis promptness (29%) and timeliness of treatment (28,5%), availability of subsidized medicines (25%) and better patient routing (21%). However, 37% of respondents did not see any improvements in health care system, or found it difficult to answer. The acute problem of access to diagnostics was considered by 24%, inaccessibility of subsidized medicines — by 17%. In addition, 24% of respondents had difficulties in obtaining specialized cardiology care in the polyclinic and 18% had difficulty in obtaining high-quality medical rehabilitation for CVD.

Conclusion. In order to increase public satisfaction with the quality of care, public awareness on health maintenance and patients’ rights to receive care should be improved. In addition, possible barriers to obtaining health care should be eliminated, while consultative and diagnostic assistance and subsidized drug provision should be facilitated for receiving.

1. Drapkina OM, Samorodskaya IV, Yavelov IS, et al. Regional differences in cardiac mortality rates in Russia: the role of statistical features. Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention. 2021;20(7):2928. (In Russ.) doi:10.15829/1728-8800-2021-2928.

2. Kontsevaia AV, Myrzamatova AO, Mukaneeva DK, et al. The economic burden of main non-communicable diseases in the Russian Federation in 2016. Profilakticheskaya Meditsina. 2019;22(6):18-23. (In Russ.) doi:10.17116//profmed20192206118.

3. Shlyakhto EV, Zvartau NE, Villevalde SV, et al. Cardiovascular risk management system: prerequisites for developing, organization principles, target groups. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2019;(11):69-82. (In Russ.) doi:10.15829/1560-4071-2019-11-69-82.

4. Sadovoy MA, Kobyakova OS, Deev IA, et al. Patient satisfaction with medical care. Bulletin of Siberian Medicine. 2017;16(1):152-61. (In Russ.) doi:10.20538/1682-0363-2017-1-152-161.

5. Buzin VN, Nevzorova DV. Assessment by the population of the quality and accessibility of palliative care: sociological research. Social’nye aspekty zdorov’a naselenia [serial online]. 2022;68(4):9. (In Russ.) doi:10.21045/2071-5021-2022-68-4-9.

6. Fisenko AP, Terletskaya RN, Vinyarskaya IV, et al. Satisfaction of parents (legal representatives) with the quality of medical care provided to their disabled children. Russian Pediatric Journal. 2021;24(2):106-11. (In Russ.) doi:10.46563/1560-9561-2021-24-2-106-111.

7. Modern trends in the health care system of Russian Federation. Moscow: The State Duma Publishers, 2019. p. 80. (In Russ.)

8. Marino M, Solberg L, Springer R, et al. Cardiovascular disease preventive services among smaller primary care practices. Am J Prev Med. 2022;62(5):e285-95. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2021.10.011.

9. Studziński K, Tomasik T, Windak A, et al. The Differences in the Prevalence of Cardiovascular Disease, Its Risk Factors, and Achievement of Therapeutic Goals among Urban and Rural Primary Care Patients in Poland: Results from the LIPIDOGRAM 2015 Study. J Clin Med. 2021;10(23):5656. doi:10.3390/jcm10235656.

10. Moledina SM, Shoaib A, Graham MM, et al. Association of admitting physician specialty and care quality and outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI): insights from a national registry. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2022;8(5):557-67. doi:10.1093/ehjqcco/qcab038.

11. Chen CW, Lin YC, Shih CM, et al. Association of multiple preventive therapies postdischarge and long-term health outcomes after acute myocardial infarction. J Chin Med Assoc. 2021;84(12):1084-91. doi:10.1097/JCMA.0000000000000621.

12. Hwang J, Vu GT, Tran BX, et al. Measuring satisfaction with health care services for Vietnamese patients with cardiovascular diseases. PLoS One. 2020;15(6):e0235333. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0235333.

13. Li Y, Gong W, Kong X, et al. Factors associated with outpatient satisfaction in tertiary hospitals in China: A systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(19):7070. doi:10.3390/ijerph17197070.

14. Mohammadzadeh N, Rezayi S, Tanhapour M, et al. Telecardiology interventions for patients with cardiovascular Disease: A systematic review on characteristics and effects. Int J Med Inform. 2021;158:104663. doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2021.104663.

15. Jafari-Oori M, Moradian ST, Ebadi A, et al. Incidence of cardiac complications following COVID-19 infection: An umbrella meta-analysis study. Heart Lung. 2022;52:136-45. doi:10.1016/j.hrtlng.2022.01.001.

16. Chernyavskaya TK, Glezer MG. Clinical characteristics and treatment of outpatients with chronic heart failure in the Moscow Region. Almanac of Clinical Medicine. 2021;49(2):125-31. (In Russ.) doi:10.18786/2072-0505-2021-49-023.