Umeå University's logo

Background: The Swedish Primary Health Care (PHC) system has, like in other European countries, undergone a gradual transition towards marketization and privatization, most distinctly through a 2010 choice reform. The reform led to an overall but regionally heterogenous expansion of private PHC providers in Sweden, and with evidence also pointing to possible inequities in various aspects of PHC provision. Evidence on the reform's impact on population-level primary health care performance and equity in performance remains scarce. The present study therefore aimed to examine whether the increase in private provision after the reform impacted on population-average rates of avoidable hospitalizations, as well as on corresponding socioeconomic inequities.

Methods: This register-based study used a multiple-group interrupted time-series design for the study period 2001-2017, with the study population (N = 51 million observations) randomly drawn from the total Swedish population aged 18-85 years. High, medium, and low implementing comparison groups were classified by tertiles of increase in private PHC providers after the reform. PHC performance was measured by avoidable hospitalizations, and socioeconomic position by education and income. Interrupted time series analysis based on individual-level data was used to estimate the reform impact on avoidable hospitalization risk, and on inequities through the Relative Index of Inequality (RII).

Results: All three comparisons groups displayed decreasing risk of avoidable hospitalizations but increasing socioeconomic inequities across the study period. Compared to regions with little change in provision after the reform, regions with large increase in private provision saw a steeper decrease in avoidable hospitalizations after the reform (relative risk (95%): 1.6% (1.1; 2.1)), but at the same time steeper increase in inequities (by education: 2.0% (0.1%; 4.0); by income: 2.2% (-0.1; 4.3)).

Conclusions: The study suggests that the increase in private health care centers, enabled by the choice reform, contributed to a small improvement when it comes to overall PHC performance, but simultaneously to increased socioeconomic inequities in PHC performance. This duality in the impact of the Swedish reform also reflects the arguments in the European health policy debate on patient choice PHC models, with hopes of improved performance but fears of increased inequities.