• 한국경제지리학회지
• /
• 제10권2호
• /
• pp.153-166
• /
• 2007

우리나라의 의료기관은 시설규모와 제공하는 진료과목 등에 의해 크게 의원, 병원, 종합병원으로 구분되는데 각기 입지적 특성이 다르게 나타난다. 특히 1차 진료기관에 해당하는 의원들은 병원시설의 설립과 운영을 모두 민간부문에서 담당하고 있어 그들의 입지선정에는 영리를 목적으로 하는 사적 부문의 입지원리가 작용하고 있다. 또한 진료 전문과목에 따라 환자의 발생 빈도나 의료서비스 선택의 선호도에 작용하는 요인에 차이가 있고, 요구되는 의료시설 및 장비의 자본 집약성에 차이가 있어 전문과목마다 각기 개원의원의 입지 선택이 다르게 이루어져 전문과목별 공간분포에 차이를 보인다. 본 연구에서는 진료 전문과목별로 사적 부문에서 개원하는 의원들의 공간적 분포에 나타나는 특징을 분석해 보았다. 이를 위하여 이러한 개원의원이 가장 많이 분포하고 있는 서울지역을 대상지역으로 전문과목별로 개원하는 의원들을 대상으로 입지계수를 산출하여 공간적 분포패턴을 분석하였다. 특히 지역적 편중이 심한 성형외과 의원이 집중 분포하고 있는 강남구를 대상으로 집적과정을 미시적 접근으로 분석해 보았다.

• 보건행정학회지
• /
• 제2권1호
• /
• pp.42-65
• /
• 1992

To survey the specialties or sujects of practice displayed by the private practitioners the authors visited 691 clinics in Taegu from April 1 to May 18, 1991, At the same time, a mail questionnaire was administered to ask the number of displayed subjects of practice, and the reasons for displaying the subjects, reasons for not displaying in case of no specialty was displayed, composition of patients, and role as a specialist. The questionnaire was returned by 308(44.6%) practitioners. The distributions of private practitioners by specialty were 13.9% for internal medicine (IM), 11.7% for pediatrics(Ped), 13.0% for obstetrics '||'&'||' gynecology(OBGY), 11.1% for general surgery(GS), 10.0% for family practice(FP), and 5.3% for general practitioner(GP). Ninety percent of the specialists have displayed their specialty in their offices. Among all the private practitioners, 61.9% of them have displayed their subjects of practice and 23.7% have shown telephone number. Among private practitioners who displayed the subjects of practice, 80.6% have signs of 'subjects of practice'. Mean number of the displayed subjects of practice for the all private practitioners is 1.20, and 1.93 for the private practitioners who displayed subjects of practice. FP and GS have displayed their subjects of practice in 91.2% and 87.0% respectively and OBGY have displayed in 32.2%, the lowest percentage among all the soecuaktues. IM specialists displays pediatrics as a major subject of practice in 72.1% the pediatricians display IM in 88.9% the OBGYs display pediatrics in 77.8%, and the GSs display IM in 51.9%. Most commonly displayed subjects of practice are Ped and IM. Sixty-five percent of the private practitioners answered that they don't display their specialties because their clinics are "primary health care facility". The reasons for displaying the subjects of practice and its relevance with their own specialty(45.6%), and the difficulty in clinic management only with the patients for their own specialty(36.9%). The proportion of clinics whose patients of other specialty are than their own specialty accounted less than 10% was 52.8% and that accounted more than 51% was 16.0%. Specially, 51.4% of GS specialists cared more than 51% of patients of other specialty area than their own specialty. Most of the patients of IM, Ped, and OBGY specialists are the patients of their own specialty. However, 56.8% of GS care more of IM patients and only 24.3% of them care mostly GS patients, The respondents to the mail questionnaire who stated that they can not play the role of specialist well are 30.5% and especially 72.9% of the GS specialists state so. The proportion of respondents who do not suffort the private practice of specialists is 71.1%. Among the surgical specialists, 82.7% of them rarely perform operation. The reasons for not performing operation are insufficient insurance fee (76.9%), and risk of operation(58.0%), so as the OBGY specialists. Above finidngs suggest that most of the specialists, especially surgeons, in the private practice can not play their role as a specialist. It is necessary to develop a policy that facilitates the production of practice and the retention of the specialists in the hospitals.s.