• Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.153-166
• /
• 2007

This study attempts to investigate the spatial characteristics of medical hospital distributions in Korea. For the purpose we examine the inter- and intra regional variations in the distributions of clinics by specialty subject. In particular, we analyze the distribution patterns of Location Quotients of clinics for 12 specialty subjects in Seoul. Medical services tend to be concentrated on the large cities, especially in the Metropolitan Seoul Area. In particular, clinics and medical doctors as well as large scale general hospitals have been strongly concentrated on the Metropolitan Seoul area. These circumstace may be related with the fact that medical hospitals are established and operated by private sector in Korea, and thus they attempt to find their location where they can get maximum profit. The distribution patterns of clinics of 12 specialty subjects can be classified to several characteristic patterns. In particular, clinics of plastic surgeon tend to be strongly concentrated on the Gangnam area in Seoul. Finally, clinics of plastic surgeon tend to be located on the areas near the subway stations along the subway Line 2 and Line 3 in the beginning. The existence of plastic surgeons turns out to have significant role on determining the location for the newly opening plastic surgeons in the later. Therefore, their agglomeration has been getting more strongly.

• Health Policy and Management
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• 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.