ObjectiveTo systematically review the satisfaction of Chinese residents with the contract services of family doctors. MethodsCNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, PubMed, Web of Science, and EMbase databases were electronically searched to collect cross-sectional studies related to the Chinese residents' satisfaction with the service of family doctors from January 2011 to May 2021. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Meta-analysis was then performed using Stata 14.1 software. ResultsA total of 42 cross-sectional studies were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that the overall satisfaction rate of residents with the contract services of family doctors was 77.7% (95%CI 73.7% to 81.7%). The results of subgroup analysis showed that the satisfaction rate of the male and female residents were 83.0% and 84.3%; <60 and ≥60 years old residents were 83.5% and 81.7%; junior high school or below, senior high school or technical secondary school, junior college or above educational level residents were 84.1%, 76.4% and 81.2%; the monthly income less than 4000 yuan and more than 4000 yuan residents were 78.5% and 79.3%; with and without diseases residents were 85.3% and 79.7%; with and without spouse residents were 80.6% and 82.4%; on and off the job residents were 77.7% and 73.9%; urban and rural residents were 78.7% and 80.0%; in 2011-2015 and 2016-2020 were 67.6% and 76.2%; eastern and western regions residents were 76.5% and 79.7%; relevant studies which were conducted by random sampling and nonrandom sampling were 80.5% and 73.5%. ConclusionsThere is still room for improvement in residents' satisfaction with family doctor contract service. Residents with different education levels, disease situations, on-the-job situations, time, regions and sampling methods have differences in their satisfaction with the contract services of family doctors.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the willingness rate of Chinese residents to renew family doctors contract services. MethodsPubMed, Web of Science, EMbase, ScienceDirect, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect cross-sectional studies related to the willingness of Chinese residents to renew family doctors contract services from inception to November 2021. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Meta-analysis was then performed by using Stata 16.0 software. ResultsA total of 23 cross-sectional studies involving 22 629 subjects were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that the willingness rate of Chinese residents to renew family doctors contract services was 84.2% (95%CI 80.0% to 88.3%). The results of subgroup analysis showed that contracted residents who were surveyed in 2011 to 2015 (85.7%), living in eastern (87.0%) and urban (84.7%), above age 60 (88.5%), females (85.1%), non-married (86.5%), with primary school and below education level (91.4%), with employee medical insurance (84.5%) and residents medical insurance (85.2%), not working (77.9%), with high and medium levels of health status (84.5%), with chronic diseases (86.7%), preferred to consult general diseases in primary health care institutions (89.5%), and walking to nearby community health service institutions requiring less than 30 minutes (86.9%) had a relatively high willingness to renew contracts. The contracted residents whose health status improved (91.0%), medical expenses reduced (91.5%) and medical portability improved (88.4%), more satisfied with contracted services (85.3%), more trusted in contracted doctors (87.9%), knowing family doctors’ name (86.7%) and contact information (84.2%) and enjoying visiting medical service (79.7%), telephone follow-up (79.6%), and health files establishment (80.1%) were more willing to renew contracts. ConclusionCurrent evidence suggests that the willingness of Chinese residents to renew family doctors contract services is high, however, it remains to be improved. Due to the limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.