Efficiency Evaluation and Spatial Autocorrelation Analysis of Primary Health Care Resources Distribution: The Panel Three-Stage DEA Model

Research Article

J Community Med Health Care. 2022; 7(1): 1057.

Efficiency Evaluation and Spatial Autocorrelation Analysis of Primary Health Care Resources Distribution: The Panel Three-Stage DEA Model

Liu YL1,2, Xu RX1, Meng XH1, Ye YP1 and Xu CM2,3*

1School of Humanity and Management, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, China

2Ningbo Municipal Hospital of TCM Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, China

3School of Law, Zhejiang University, China

*Corresponding author: Xu CM, College of Humanity and Management, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Gaoke Road, Fuyang District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province, China

Received: June 27, 2022; Accepted: August 01, 2022; Published: August 08, 2022

Abstract

Objective: To analyse the distribution of Primary Health Care (PHC) in efficiency among provinces from 2010 to 2019 in China, to examine the factors influencing performance, and to describe the spatial agglomeration characteristics of allocation efficiency, so as to optimize and balance the utilization thereof.

Method: Using a panel Three-stage DEA comparative analysis model to describe factors that may lead to high efficiency, combined with a descriptive study for spatial agglomerating features of provinces using Spatial autocorrelation analysis.

Results: The overall performance of PHC distribution efficiency is unreasonable, with an average comprehensive technical efficiency of 0.688 from 2010 to 2019. The external and management noise had a significant impact on the efficiency of PHC resource allocation. The increase in per capital GDP could enhance the efficiency, but the dependence ratio of the elderly population and the rate of urbanization were inversely. The effectiveness of PHC allocation had spatial agglomeration features. Moran’s I index was the lowest in 2016 (0.293) and the highest in 2019 (0.421) at the significance level of 1%. The Getis_Ord GI* index demonstrates that the general level of spatial agglomeration had improved, with the number of cluster provinces increasing from 11 to 15.

Conclusion: The PHC distribution efficiency should be improved, the establishment of balanced eastern, central and western regions should be encouraged, and a new PHC ecosystem should be established. Further, new patterns should be created in the geographic area of primary health care, and citizens’ access to medical services should be increased.

Keywords: Regional distribution efficiency; Panel three-stage DEA; Spatial autocorrelation analysis

Introduction

Primary Health Care (PHC) is one of the most effective and efficient strategies to maintain good health [1,2]. Increasing the input of PHC allows people to access the health care they need more easily, thereby compensating for the fact that hospital-centered health-care systems require high costs but are unable to fulfill people’s needs and are not sustainable in the long term [3]. Due to rising prevalence and economic constraints, effective PHC levels are required [4]. As such, PHC competency should be improved. In China community health service centers and community health service stations are located primarily in cities, while township health centers and village clinics are located primarily in rural areas. Despite the significant increase in total PHC resources over the last ten years, the number of grassroots medical and health institutions, beds, and personnel at the end of 2020 increased by 7.58 percent, 38.35 percent, and 32.23 percent, respectively, compared with 2010. However, there was a significant disparity between PHC institutions and hospitals. By the end of 2020, PHC institutions accounted for 94.83 percent of total national medical and health institutions, or 31.96 times the total number of hospitals. Further, there is an unbalanced geographic distribution of PHC [5] between urban and rural areas, among the three regions, and among various provinces, resulting in disparities in medical service utilization. In summary, grass-roots medical and health resources face issues such as insufficient total amount, unbalanced allocation, and failure to demonstrate the benefits of high accessibility. So, how to optimize the regional distribution of PHC efficiency has become a hot issue that needs to be studied. The allocation efficiency of medical and health resource at the grass-roots level needs to be evaluated from two dimensions: time and space, and the influencing factors need to be studied. Policy solutions should be formulated to improve and balance regional resource allocation efficiency and provide ideas for further assisting decision makers.

The measurement methods adopted in previous studies typically include non-parameter methods such as Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and the parameter method as Stochastic Frontier Analysis (SFA). Proposed by Charles and Cooper (1978) to evaluate inputoutput efficiency [6], DEA is a nonparametric linear programming model that solves the problem of heterogeneity among decision making units and is widely used for measuring and comparing hospital and health efficiency. However, Single DEA failed to consider the influence of environmental variables and random errors on efficiency thus resulting in inaccurate measurement. Timmer (1971) pioneered a typical two-stage approach follows a first stage DEA exercise based on inputs and outputs with a second stage regression analysis seeking to explain variation in first stage.1, and several subsequent studies have improved upon Timmer’ Second stage by using limited dependent variable regression techniques, since it can’t strip away the influence of environmental effects and random errors on the efficiency value, Fried (2002) et al. [7] proposed a three-stage DEA model, in which the nonparametric DEA model was combined with the parametric SFA (Stochastic Frontier Analysis) model. This model not only retains the advantage that DEA does not need to set the overall distribution assumption, but also considers external environmental factors, random disturbance, and management inefficiency, so as to obtain a more realistic efficiency value. Simar and Wilson (2011) verified that in the practice of DEA efficiency estimates are regressed on some environmental variables in a second-stage analysis, and think the second-stage regressions are well-defined and meaningful [8].

DEA and the extended methods thereof have been extensively adopted to measure the differences in health resource distribution efficiency [9,10]. This method of using regression model to analyze influencing factors in the second stage is mainly represented by DEATobit [11-12], which has been widely used in the study of health resource efficiency in recent years [13]. However, although this method can identify the main influencing factors of health resource efficiency, it can’t calculate the exact efficiency value. Although the three-stage method has eliminated the environmental impact and statistical noise, it can re-evaluate the efficiency to obtain more realistic value. At present, it is rarely used in the research of health resource efficiency evaluation. Some scholars use the three-stage DEA method to study hospitals [14]. However, it is only based on crosssectional data, and does not involve the panel data, so it can’t reflect efficiency changes in a long period. In addition, existing research shows that there is a certain spatial agglomeration of medical and health resources [15]. On this basis, this study further analyzes the spatial agglomeration characteristics of the allocation efficiency of primary medical resources, thus expanding the research scope of evaluating PHC efficiency in different provinces.

Materials and Methods

Data Source and Defined Variable

The data used in the present study were obtained from the China Health Statistics Yearbook (2011-2020) and the China Statistics Yearbook (2011-2020). According to the regional classification standard of the national statistics, 31 provinces (excluding Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao) in China are divided into three regions: eastern, central and western.

Variable indicators that are aligned with the characteristics of medical services have been widely adopted in research on health resources [16,17]. Inputs, Outputs, and the Environment index are the three dimensions [18,19]. The number of medical Institutions (IN), the Number of Beds (BN), and the Number of Personnel (PN) are among the input dimensions. The numbers of medical institutions and beds are sensitive indicators of the scale of medical resources. The input personnel comprise not only physicians, nurses, laboratory staff, radiology staff, and other health and technical staff, but also administrative, logistics, and other support departments. That because medical practice requires a high level of team collaboration [20]. The Number of Outpatients (ON) and Discharges (DN) are the output dimension variables, which provide the most direct indication of the efficiency of outpatient (emergency) diagnosis [21]. The number of visits and discharges are the output dimension variables [22].

In the present study, the main focus was on the characteristics that have a large impact on efficiency, are not subject to the sample’s subjective control, and are difficult to modify in a short period of time when choosing environmental dimension variables [23,24]. The impacts of economic development, policy direction, social development, and demographic variables on medical and health resource allocation were also analyzed. Four factors were specified to assure the comprehensiveness of the selection of environmental variables and data availability. To measure the level of local economic growth, Regional GDP per capital (RPGDP) was used. In general, the stronger the financial capability and the greater the involvement in medical and health development, the higher the level of local economic development. The Density of Population (DP) per unit area of land is directly tied to the development of local economic, political, and social systems. The Elderly Population’s Dependency Ratio (EPDR) reflects the degree of social aging and the overall social burden of the elderly population, influencing the allocation of health resources. Meanwhile, the Urbanization Rate (UR) reflects changes in people’s health demands and medical service preferences as cities grow.