Attitudes towards reforming primary care in Belgium: social network analysis in a pluralist context

Abstract

Objectives Health care policies are influenced by many groups which in turn influence each other. Our aim was to describe a network of nominated influential stakeholders and analyze how it affects attitudes to reforming primary care. Methods Face-to-face interviews were carried out in Belgium with 102 influential people. Each respondent was asked to score solutions for improving the role of general practice in the health care system and to nominate up to six other influential stakeholders. Social network and multivariate analyses were used to describe the nomination network and its effect on attitudes to reform. Results The network was highly centralized and homophilous (tendency to bond with people who are similar) for language groups. Despite Belgium having a strong pluralist tradition of decision making, policy makers were central to the network (average indegree = 10.8) compared to professional representatives (6.9). Respondents supported an enhanced role for general practitioners but did not support radically new policies. Conclusion Social network analysis contributes to understanding why health care reforms may languish in pluralistic, decentralized health care systems. The central position of a stakeholder in a network is related to perceived influence but does not favour a radical policy orientation. In addition, language-group homophily in the ‘perceived influence network’ leads to a weak coalition that only favours small-step reform.