Analyze of Home Healthcare Services Implementations by Public Health Institutions in Turkey: Nationwide Retrospective Study Results
نویسندگان
1 Ministry of Family and Social Policies, Department of Administration, Ankara, Turkey
2 University of Health Sciences, Ankara Dr. Adurrahman Yurtaslan Oncology Training and Research Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Ankara, Turkey
3 University of Health Sciences, Ankara Dr Adurrahman Yurtaslan Oncology Training and Research Hospital, Department of Chest Diseases, Ankara, Turkey
4 University of Health Sciences, Sanatoryum Training and Research Hospital, Department of Chest Diseases, Ankara,Turkey
5 University of Health Sciences, Ankara City Hospital, Department of Family Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
6 University of Health Sciences, Ankara Dr. Adurrahman Yurtaslan Oncology Training and Research Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Ankara, Turkey
doi
10.22034/ircmj.2025.440152.0چکیده
Background and Objectives: Home healthcare services (HHCS) are provided with public or private help through an institutional structuring. Until 2011, whole population-based HHCS were not available in Turkey, built by either the government or the private sector. We aimed to analyze the change and effectiveness of home health care services performed between 2011-2017 in Turkey. Methods: The study was performed retrospectively. Information related to the structuring of HHCS, disease groups, personnel status, and variety of performed services were gathered from the Turkish Ministry of Health database. Results: It was found that the number of HHCS Units, the number of patients that were reached, the number of active patients, and the number of visited patients increased between 2011-2017 (2.5, 9.1, 4.2, and 7.2 times respectively). The number of patients aged 65 and over was 70.5%. The most commonly observed system diseases were neurological and psychiatric (42%), cardiovascular (23%), and musculoskeletal system (15%). The type of services given to the patients besides medical examination was the education of the patients and their caregivers (26.21%), wound care (25.6%), and blood sampling (14.3%). Conclusion: In our opinion, between 2011 and 2017, the significant increase in capacity and prevalence of HHCS was majorly due to fine promotion, good coordination, rapid access, and adequate service provision. Furthermore, we believe that these models may contribute to national and international health policies.
