ObjectiveWe explore how public satisfaction with the healthcare system in China varies with social and economic factors, especially regional variations and changes during 2013–2015.DesignPopulation-based, cross-sectional survey performed between July 2013 and July 2015.SettingGeneral population of China during 2013–2015.ParticipantsA total of 15 969 participants (women=49.4%, sample-weighted average age=51.9).Primary outcome measurePublic satisfaction with the healthcare system, defined as ‘being satisfied’ if a respondent’s satisfaction score is ≥70 points.ResultsThe 2-year mean of the satisfaction score of the sample is 68.5 out of 100 points and the score in 2015 is higher than 2013 by 3.5 points. Senior respondents (OR=1.19, p<0.001), rural respondents (OR=1.23, p=0.009) and those with higher socioeconomic status are more likely to report being satisfied. Internal migrants (OR=0.75, p<0.001) and those with a higher level of education are less likely to report being satisfied. Total health expenditure as percentage of gross domestic product and density of hospital beds have a significantly positive association with satisfaction (OR=1.13, p<0.001). Meanwhile, the government’s share in total healthcare expenditures has a moderately negative association with satisfaction (OR=0.97, p<0.001). In rural areas, the density of hospital beds has a positive association with satisfaction (OR=1.26, p=0.002). The Northeast region and Shanghai (OR=0.49, p<0.001; OR=0.71, p=0.034) are less likely to report being satisfied and this remained unchanged in 2015.ConclusionThere are considerable disparities in public satisfaction with the healthcare system in China, associated with demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, regional locations, urban–rural environment, and regional health resource abundance. Actions are recommended to improve satisfaction with the public healthcare system, especially in the Northeast region of China.

Objective To explore the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in perioperative period of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. Materials and methods A systematic literature search using Pubmed, Embase, and the Chinese SinoMed, CNKI, WanFang and VIP databases was performed to find comparative studies on the efficacy of different antibiotic prophylaxis strategies in PCNL for preventing postoperative sepsis. The last search was conducted on 21 April 2019. All selected articles were reviewed independently by two, and in case of discordance, three reviewers. Summarized unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) or risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the efficacy of different antibiotic prophylaxis strategies. Results Thirteen independent studies comprising up to 1549 individuals were included. Compared with single dose before anesthesia, preoperative prophylactic antibiotics significantly reduced postoperative sepsis (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.20-0.50; P < 0.00001) and fever (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.14-0.48; P < 0.0001). But no remarkable difference in sepsis risk between patients with and without postoperative prophylactic antibiotics was detected (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.72-1.97; P = 0.49). And patients receiving postoperative prophylactic antibiotics were at a significantly high risk of fever (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.01-3.05; P = 0.05). Compared with single dose before anesthesia, preoperative prophylactic antibiotics significantly reduced positive pelvic urine (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.09-0.54; P = 0.0009) and stone cultures (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.25-0.64; P = 0.0001). Conclusions The conclusion is drawn that preoperative prophylactic antibiotics indeed lowered the risk of postoperative sepsis and fever, whereas its postoperative use seems unnecessary. Besides, preoperative prophylactic antibiotics reduced positive pelvic urine and stone cultures significantly, which are a risk factor for sepsis. In our meta-analysis, the efficacy of different types of antibiotics and different courses of preoperative antibiotics could not be assessed. To verify the correctness of these conclusions, randomized controlled trials with a larger sample size and more rigorous study design are required.

(1) Background: Public satisfaction with the health system is a very important comprehensive indicator. Given the limited healthcare resources in a society, it is always important for policymakers to have full information about the priority and the ranking order of the factors of healthcare resources for improving public satisfaction. (2) Methods: Grey Relational Analysis (GRA) is advantageous for satisfaction analysis because satisfaction is a “grey concept” of “having a clear boundary but vague connotation”. The data were from the CGSS and the China Health Statistics Yearbook (2013 and 2015), with a total of 15,969 samples (average satisfaction score = 68.5, age = 51.9, female = 49.4%). (3) Results: The government’s percentage of total expenditure on healthcare was ranked as the most important factor for public satisfaction with the health system in China in both 2013 and 2015. The second most important factor changed from “Out-of-pocket percentage of individuals” in 2013 to “Hospital beds per thousand populations” in 2015. Meanwhile, “Healthcare workforce per thousand populations” increased from the least important factor in 2013 to the 3rd in 2015. Disparities in the ranking orders of the factors among regions of China were identified too. (4) Conclusions: The analysis results suggest that during recent years the priority of Chinese residents’ healthcare satisfaction for healthcare resources has shifted on the national level from economic affordability to more intensive “people-centered” services, while the regional disparities and gaps need to receive more attention and be further improved in the healthcare reform of next round.