Background During the first COVID-19 pandemic ‘lockdown’ in Aotearoa/New Zealand (March–May 2020, in which strict ‘stay at home’ measures were introduced), general practices were advised to use telephone and video consultations (telehealth) wherever possible instead of the usual in-person visits. This was a sudden change for most practices and patients. This research aimed to explore how patients accessed general practice during lockdown and evaluate their experiences with telehealth, to inform how telehealth could be most effectively used in the future. Methods Using a mixed-method approach, we undertook an online survey and in-depth interviews with adults (> 18 years) who had contact with practices during lockdown, recruited through social media and email lists. We present descriptive statistics from the survey data (n = 1010) and qualitative analysis of interview data (n = 38) and open-ended survey questions, using a framework of access to health care, from the patient’s perspective. Results In general, patients reported high satisfaction with telehealth in general practice during lockdown. Telehealth was convenient and allowed patients to safely access health care without having to weigh-up the fear of COVID-19 infection against the need to be seen. Telehealth worked best for routine and familiar health issues and when rapport was established between patients and clinicians. This was easier with a pre-existing clinical relationship, but not impossible without one. Telehealth was less suitable when a physical examination was needed, when the diagnosis was unknown or for patients who had a strong preference to be seen in-person. Conclusions Even in this disruptive lockdown period, that prompted an unexpected and rapid implementation of telehealth services in general practices, most patients had positive experiences with telehealth. In the future, patients want the choice of consultation type to match their needs, circumstances, and preferences. Technological issues and funding barriers may need to be addressed, and clear communication for both patients and clinicians is needed about key aspects of telehealth (e.g. cost, appropriateness, privacy). Maintaining telehealth as an option post-lockdown has the potential to increase timely and safe access to primary health care for many patients.

Background: New Zealand's health system has long been seen as providing highly fragmented, poorly co-ordinated services to service users. A continuing policy challenge has been how to reduce such fragmentation and achieve more 'integrated' care, that is, 'co-ordinated' care that provides a 'smooth and continuous' transition between services, and a 'seamless' journey as service users receive health, support, and social welfare services from a range of health and other professionals.

No abstract

There are well-established frameworks for comparing the performance of health systems cross-nationally on multiple dimensions. A sub-set of such comprehensive schema is taken up by criteria specifically applied to health service delivery, including hospital performance. We focus on evaluating hospital performance, using the New Zealand public hospital sector over the period 2001-2009 as a pragmatic and illustrative case study for cross-national application. We apply a broad three-dimensional matrix--efficiency, effectiveness, equity--each based on two measures, and we undertake ranking comparisons of 35 hospitals. On the efficiency dimension--relative stay, day surgery--we find coefficients of variation of 10.8% and 8.5% respectively in the pooled data, and a slight trend towards a narrowing of inter-hospital variation over time. The correlation between these indicators is low (.20). For effectiveness--post-admission mortality, unplanned readmission--the coefficient of variation is generally higher (24.1% and 12.2%), and the trend is flat. The correlation is again low (.21). The equity dimension is assessed by quantifying the degree of ethnic and socio-economic variation for each hospital. The coefficient of variation is much higher--40.7-66.5% for ethnicity, 55.8-84.4% for socio-economic position--the trend over time is mixed, and the correlation is moderate (.41). On averaging the rank of hospitals across all measures it is evident that there is limited consistency across the three constituent dimensions. While it is possible to assess hospital performance across three dimensions using an illustrative set of standard measures derived from routine data, there appears to be little consistency in hospital rankings on these New Zealand data for the period 2001-2009. However, the methodology of using rankings derived from readily available data--possibly allied with multiple or composite indicator models--has potential for the cross-national comparison of hospital profiles, and assessments in three dimensions provide a more holistic and rounded account of performance.

No abstract