The article is based on a multidimensional conception of healthcare system performance. Our objectives are to assess the performance of the healthcare systems of 27 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries and to discern the countries' profiles according to the homogeneity of their healthcare systems' levels of performance. The analyses were carried out on data collected from the 27 high-income OECD countries, primarily using the OECD Health Data 2007 database, the World Health Organization 2008 statistics, OECD Health at a Glance and OECD Social Indicators. Each healthcare system's performance was assessed on the basis of the volume of available resources, services produced and health outcomes achieved and efficiency, effectiveness and productivity, thus characterizing the investments made in proportion to the available resources and services produced. Overall performance profiles were constructed taking into account simultaneously the level of all these components. Using multiple clusters analysis, we were able to group the countries into four profiles (satisfactory, promising, weak-polarized and limited) according to the homogeneity of their performance levels. This article offers a broad overview of the performance of these healthcare systems. The results will enable decision-makers to know the strengths and weaknesses of their own health care system and also to compare it with those of other countries.

No abstract

Background: The work of general practitioners (GPs) is increasingly being looked at from the perspective of the strategies and factors shaping it. This reflects the importance given to primary care services in health care system reform. However, the literature provides little insight into the medical decision-making processes in general practice. Our main objective was to better understand how organizational and environmental factors influence the work of GPs.

Our study provides a comprehensive view of the various dimensions that GPs consider important in their professional life. Our findings suggest that, for many GPs, the perfect practice is tailor made and implies a combination of organizational models in order to fulfil their multiple professional goals. This has important implications for decision makers who are promoting new primary care models.

This paper reports on a research collective on primary healthcare (PHC) conducted in Quebec in 2004. Thirty ongoing or recently completed studies were synthesized through a process involving a high degree of exchange among researchers who conducted the original studies, investigators and decision-makers. The viewpoints expressed by decision-makers who participated in the process were analyzed in terms of convergence with and divergence from the researchers' viewpoints. In four cases, there was convergence between the decision-makers' and the researchers' viewpoints, thus increasing the validity of the collective' s findings. The main divergence between the two groups' viewpoints concerns the strategy adopted in Quebec to create local health and social services networks. Such divergence reflects the distinction made by Klein between scientific evidence and organizational and political evidence. Our study results illustrate that decision-makers' viewpoints can play an important interpretive and complementary role in producing research syntheses. Although integrating decision-makers' viewpoints into syntheses has been regarded as a strategy for improving the use of research findings, our analysis shows that decision-makers' view