Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Multilevel model results

From: Is the co-location of GPs in primary care centres associated with a higher patient satisfaction? Evidence from a population survey in Italy

Multilevel model results Null model Full model
FAG = n. 28; GP = n. 549; patient = n. 1.998 FAG = n. 28; GP = n. 538; patient = n. 1.809
Fixed effects Coeff. S.E. P Coeff. S.E. p
Level 1       
Intercept 83.98 0.45 p < 0.001 81.64 5.17 p < 0.001
Co-location of multidisciplinary team in primary care centres
Patients of GP within PCC with experience of multidisciplinary team (ref)       
 Patients of GP within PCC without experience of multidisciplinary team     -3.65 1.24 p < 0.01
 Patients of GP not in PCC with other experience of multidisciplinary team     -2.59 1.51  
 Patients of GP not in PCC without any experience of multidisciplinary team     -3.44 1.22 p < 0.01
Gender
 Female     -0.67 0.66  
Age group 18–45 y (ref)       
 46–65 y     1.38 0.81  
 65+ y     1.54 1.08  
Educational level Low (primary) (ref)
 Medium (secondary)     -0.52 1.13  
 High (high school, degree)     -0.59 1.17  
Self-reported health status Bad (ref)       
 Fair     3.01 1.13 p < 0.01
 Good     5.96 1.23 p < 0.001
Self-reported chronic conditions
 Yes     1.73 0.78 p < 0.05
Frequency of visits to GP in the last year Never (ref)
 Rarely (1–4 times/year)     2.69 2.13  
 Sometimes (at least 5 times/year)     3.87 2.18  
Main reason for visit to GP Health     2.10 0.67 p < 0.01
Level 2       
Gender       
 Female     -0.36 0.87  
Age     -0.14 0.07 p < 0.05
Patient practice size     0.004 0.001 p < 0.001
Random part Var. S.E. CI Var. S.E. CI
 Level 3 variance (FAG) 2.43 1.55 0.70–8.47 3.20 1.77 1.08–9.46
 Level 2 variance (GP) 10.12 3.97 4.69–21.81 6.93 4.07 2.19–21.91
 Level 1 variance (patient) 185.19 6.66 172.58–198.72 182.53 6.99 169.33–196.75
ICC ICC S.E. CI ICC S.E. CI
 FAG 0.012 0.008 0.004–0.042 0.017 0.009 0.006–0.048
 GP 0.063 0.020 0.034–0116 0.053 0.022 0.023–0.115