Countrywide survey on utilization of medical devices by GPs in Hungary: advantages of the cluster-practice model

BACKGROUND: Expectations towards general practitioners (GPs) are continuously increasing to provide a more systematic preventive- and definitive-based care, a wider range of multidisciplinary team-based services and to integrate state-of-the-art digital solutions into daily practice. Aided by development programmes, Hungarian primary care is facing the challenge to fulfil its role as the provider of comprehensive, high quality, patient-centred, preventive care, answering the challenges caused by non-communicable diseases (NCDs). AIM: The article aims to provide an insight into the utilization of simple, digital, medical devices. We show the relationship between the primary health care (PHC) practice models and the used types of devices. We point at further development directions of GP practices regarding the utilization of evidence-based medical technologies and how such devices support the screening and chronic care of patients with NCDs in everyday practice. METHODS: Data were collected using an online self-assessment questionnaire from 1800 Hungarian GPs registered in Hungary. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon’s test and χ (2) test were applied to analyze the ownership and utilization of 32 types of medical devices, characteristics of the GP practices and to highlight the differences between traditional and cluster-based operating model. FINDINGS: Based on the responses from 27.7% of all Hungarian GPs, the medical device infrastructure was found to be limited especially in single GP-practices. Those involved in development projects of GP’s clusters in the last decade reported a wider range and significantly more intensive utilization of evidence-based technologies (average number of devices: 5.42 versus 7.56, P<.001), but even these GPs are not using some of their devices (e.g., various point of care testing devices) due to the lack of financing. In addition, GPs involved in GPs-cluster development model programmes showed significantly greater willingness for sharing relatively expensive, extra workforce-demanding technologies (χ (2) = 24.5, P<.001).