Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (11)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Meng, Q.
Right arrow Articles by Shi, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Meng, Q.
Right arrow Articles by Shi, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Health Policy and Planning; 15(4): 349-356
© Oxford University Press 2000

Part issue: Health Sector Regulation

Comparing the services and quality of private and public clinics in rural China

Qingyue Meng1, Xingzhu Liu2 and Junshi Shi3

1 Institute of Social Medicine and Health Policy, Shandong Medical University, Jinan, Shandong, People’s Republic of China,
2 Global Program on Evidence for Policy, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland and
3 Bureau of Public Health of Jining City, Jining, Shandong, People’s Republic of China

After 15 years eradication of the private health sector in Socialist China, private practice was restored in 1980 along with the market oriented economic reform. In recent years, however, debates on its pros and cons are increasing. Arguments against private practice have led to a ban on private practice in some rural counties. The arguments against private practice state that the service quality of private clinics tends to be lower than that of public ones; private clinics are less likely to provide preventive care; and private clinics are more likely to provide over-treatment. This paper presents the major findings from a study conducted in China, aiming at comparing private and public village health clinics in terms of quality of services, willingness to provide preventive care and over-prescription of drugs. While it was found that the quality of services was poor and a large proportion of patient expenditure was due to over-treatment for all village clinics, there was no difference between public and private clinics. Both private and public clinics were willing to provide preventive services if they were subsidized for the provision. This study finds no evidence that care provided by private clinics is inferior to that of public clinics.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social ScienceHome page
Z. Zimmer, T. Kaneda, and L. Spess
An Examination of Urban Versus Rural Mortality in China Using Community and Individual Data
J. Gerontol. B. Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci., September 1, 2007; 62(5): S349 - S357.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.