↓ Skip to main content

Potential barriers in healthcare access of the elderly population influenced by the economic crisis and the troika agreement: a qualitative case study in Lisbon, Portugal

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
260 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Potential barriers in healthcare access of the elderly population influenced by the economic crisis and the troika agreement: a qualitative case study in Lisbon, Portugal
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12939-017-0679-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia Doetsch, Eva Pilot, Paula Santana, Thomas Krafft

Abstract

The recent economic and financial crisis in Portugal urged the Portuguese Government in April 2011 to request financial assistance from the troika austerity bail out program to get aid for its government debt. The troika agreement included health reforms and austerity measures of the National Health Service (NHS) in Portugal to save non-essential health care costs. This research aimed to identify potential barriers among the elderly population (aged 65 and above) to healthcare access influenced by the economic crisis and the troika agreement focussing on the Memorandum of Understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality (MoU) in Lisbon metropolitan area, Portugal. The qualitative study is including 13 semi-structured interviews of healthcare experts, municipality authority, health care providers, negotiator of the troika agreement, hospital managers, health economists and elderly. A content analysis was performed to evaluate the interviews applying Nvivo2011 software. The barriers identified were clustered towards the five areas of the 'Conceptual framework on health care access' by Levesque et al. (Int J Equity Health 12:18, 2013). Healthcare access for the elderly was found inadequate in four areas of the framework: availability; appropriateness; approachability; and affordability. The fifth area on acceptability was not identified since the study neither followed a gender nor ethnic specific purpose. The main identified barriers were: current financial situation and pension cuts; insufficient provision and increased user fees in primary care; inadequate design and availability of hospital care service; lack of long-term care facilities; increased out-of-pocket-payment on pharmaceuticals; limitations in exemption allowances; cuts in non-emergent health transportation; increased waiting time for elective surgery; and poor unadapted housing conditions for elderly. The health reforms and health budget cuts in the MoU implemented as part of the troika agreement have been associated with increasing health inequalities in access to healthcare services for the elderly population. The majority of responses disclosed an increasing deficiency across the entire National Health Service (NHS) to collaborate, integrate and communicate between the different healthcare sectors for providing adequate care to the elderly. An urgent necessity of restructuring the health care system to adapt towards the elderly population was implied.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 260 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 260 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 15%
Student > Bachelor 31 12%
Researcher 29 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 9%
Student > Postgraduate 12 5%
Other 34 13%
Unknown 93 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 13%
Social Sciences 29 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 3%
Psychology 5 2%
Other 34 13%
Unknown 110 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 November 2017.
All research outputs
#3,362,127
of 25,383,278 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#623
of 2,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,900
of 334,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#19
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,383,278 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,216 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.