Authors: S. Býma 1; J. Bělobrádek 1; P. Šonka 2; P. Borský 1 Authors‘ workplace: Univerzita Karlova v Praze, Lékařská fakulta v Hradci Králové Ústav preventivního lékařství Přednostka: prof. MUDr. Lenka Borská, Ph. D. 1; Medison s. r. o. ordinace praktického lékaře Přeštice Vedoucí: MUDr. Petr Šonka 2 Published in: Prakt. Lék. 2026; 106(1): 3-18 Category: Of different specialties
Background: The Society of General Medicine of the Czech Medical Association periodically monitors citizens’opinions on selected aspects of healthcare and healthy lifestyle. This publication follows on from previous survey results conducted between 2015 and 2024.
Objectives and methodology: The aim of the research was to determine the opinions of citizens on selected aspects of the work of general practitioners (GPs) and on the healthcare system and their role in it. The research was conducted in November 2025 and was designed as a sociological study. The field survey was conducted using a standardised controlled interview technique between an interviewer and a respondent (face-to-face). Data collection was carried out by 220 professional interviewers from the INRES Agency throughout the Czech Republic. Visual and logical checks, coding and data entry, tabulation, and interpretation of results were carried out by INRES Agency staff. Statistical processing of the data was performed using the SASD 1.5.8 program (Statistical Analysis of Social Data). The data were obtained from a sample of 1,805 individuals selected by quota sampling. The sample is representative of the population of the Czech Republic aged 15 and over
Results: In most cases, Czech citizens are satisfied with the care and time devoted to them by their general practitioner during their visit; only a small proportion (7.6%) have a negative opinion. Most citizens are also satisfied with the work of nurses in their general practitioner’s office. Partial or complete dissatisfaction in this regard was expressed by 4.9% of respondents. This corresponds to the findings of the international PaRIS project (17 countries), in which over 90% of citizens in the Czech Republic reported satisfaction. It was also found that 71.2% of citizens have had their medicines substituted in pharmacies, but 23% of citizens do not receive the relevant information about the reason for the substitution. Dietary supplements are offered to 72.7% of citizens, but 71.1% have experienced an insufficient number of packages of prescribed medication covered by health insurance. Only 26.8% of citizens insist on receiving their medications at pharmacies, but 50.7% would welcome receiving some medications at their GP’s office. Only 3.4% of citizens would get vaccinated at pharmacies, with the majority (82.8%) preferring to get vaccinated by doctors, either by their GP (57.5%) or at a vaccination centre (25.3%). As for preventive check-ups, only 8.6% would have them at a pharmacy, and only 5.5% would disclose information about their health to a pharmacist. The findings of the survey will be used in the reform of primary care in the Czech Republic.
prevention – vaccination – general practice – medication dispensing – pharmacies
1. OECD/European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies (2024). Česko: zdravotní profil země 2023. OECD Publishing, Paris (online). Dostupný z: https://doi.org/10.1787/c0c44f04-cs [cit. 2026-03-22].
2. Eurostat. Self-reported unmet needs for medical examination by sex, age, main reason declared and groups of country of citizenship (online). Dostupný z: https://doi.org/10.2908/HLTH_ SILC_30 [cit. 2026-03-22].
3. Seifert B, Král N, Býma S. Pozitivní postoje občanů k všeobecným praktickým lékařům. Prakt. Lék. 2014; 94(5): 235–238.
4. Býma S, Javorská K, Halata D, Borský P. Názory občanů na některé aspekty činnosti praktických lékařů 2024. Prakt. Lék. 2025; 105(2): 61–72.
5. Svačina, Š. Dopis předsedy ČLS JEP – č. j. 31 – 6/2025 (online). Dostupný z: https://www.svl.cz/odborny-obsah/aktualni-oznameni/dopis-predsedy-cls-jep-c-j-31-6-2025-100133 [cit. 2026 - 03-22].
6. Hassali MA, Alrasheedy AA, McLachlan A, et al. The experiences of implementing generic medicine policy in eight countries: A review and recommendations for a successful promotion of generic medicine use. Saudi Pharm J. 2014; 22(6): 491–503.
7. Toverud EL, Hartmann K, Håkonsen H. A systematic review of physicians’and pharmacists’perspectives on generic drug use: what are the global challenges? Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2015; 13(Suppl 1): S35–45.
8. Maly J, Zimcikova E, Babica J, et al. Representative sample survey on factors determining the Czech physicians’awareness of generic drugs and substitution. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019; 19(1): 777.
9. Česká lékárnická komora. Z monitoringu médií: Lékárníci odhalují často duplicity. Chrání tím zdraví pacienta a šetří prostředky veřejného zdravotního pojištění (online). Dostupný z: https://lekarnici.cz/z-monitoringu-medii-lekarnici-odhaluji-casto-duplicity-chrani-tim-zdravi-pacienta-a-setri-prostredky-verejneho-zdravotniho-pojisteni/ [cit. 2026-03-22].
10. Redakce. Lékárníci zachytí týdně stovky záměn a duplicit. Medical Tribune 2025 (online). Dostupný z: https://www.tribune.cz/ vsechny-clanky/lekarnici-zachyti-tydne-stovky-zamen-a-duplicit-v-receptech/ [cit. 2026-03-22].
11. Ministerstvo zdravotnictví ČR. Pohled Ministerstva zdravotnictví na problematiku vývozu léčivých přípravků do zahraničí (online). Dostupný z: https://sukl.gov.cz/wp-content/ uploads/2025/02/Prezentace-Seznam-reexport-a-podnety - -MAH_12.2022_Davidek.pdf [cit. 2026-03-22].
12. Rathe J, Larsen P, Andersen M, et al. Associations between generic substitution and patients’attitudes, beliefs and experiences. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2013; 69(10): 1827–1836.
13. Nokelainen H, Lämsä E, Ahonen R, Timonen J. Reasons for allowing and refusing generic substitution and factors determining the choice of an interchangeable prescription medicine: a survey among pharmacy customers in Finland. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020; 20(1): 82.
14. Drozdowska A, Hermanowski T. Exploring factors underlying the attitude of community pharmacists to generic substitution: a nationwide study from Poland. Int J Clin Pharm. 2016; 38(1): 162–170.
15. Sloeserwij VM, Hazen ACM, Zwart DLM, et al. Effects of non-dispensing pharmacists integrated in general practice on medication-related hospitalisations. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2019; 85(10): 2321–2331.
16. Sloeserwij VM, Zwart DLM, Hazen ACM, et al. Non-dispensing pharmacist integrated in the primary care team: effect on the quality of physician’s prescribing, a non-randomised comparative study. Int J Clin Pharm. 2020; 42(5): 1293–1303.
17. Österreichische Apothekerkammer. Ärztliche Hausapotheken (online). Dostupné z: https://www.apothekerkammer.at/ infothek/aktuelle-kundmachungen/apothekenverfahren/aerztliche-hausapotheken [cit. 2026-03-22].
18. Goldacre B, Reynolds C, Powell-Smith A, et al. Do doctors in dispensing practices with a financial conflict of interest prescribe more expensive drugs? A cross-sectional analysis of English primary care prescribing data. BMJ Open 2019; 9(2): e026886.
19. Gomez-Cano M, Wiering B, Abel G, et al. Medication adherence and clinical outcomes in dispensing and non-dispensing practices: a cross-sectional analysis. Br J Gen Pract. 2020; 71(702): e55–e61.
20. Cross R, McDonagh S, Cockcroft E, et al. Recruitment and retention of staff in rural dispensing practice. Rural Remote Health 2023; 23(1): 8156.
21. Blome A, Kaigh C, Shaffer C, et al. Emergency department medication dispensing reduces return visits and admissions. Am J Emerg Med. 2020; 38(11): 2387–2390.
22. Kirkdale CL, Nebout G, Megerlin F, Thornley T. Benefits of pharmacist-led flu vaccination services in community pharmacy. Ann Pharm Fr. 2017; 75(1): 3–8.
23. Liard R, Souty C, Guerrisi C, et al. Seasonal influenza vaccination in pharmacy in France: description and determinants of the vaccinated at-risk population using this service, 1 year after implementation. Int J Pharm Pract. 2022; 30(3): 253–260.
24. Romero-Mancilla MS, Mora-Vargas J, Ruiz A. Pharmacy-based immunization: a systematic review. Front Public Health 2023; 11 : 1152556.
25. Haems M, Lanzilotto M, Mandelli A, et al. European community pharmacists practice in tackling influenza. Explor Res Clin Soc Pharm. 2024; 14 : 100447.
26. Fanelli E, Ravetto Enri L, Pappaccogli M, et al. Knowledge on arterial hypertension in general population: Results from a community pharmacy screening program. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2021; 31(4): 1081–1086.
27. Santolaya M, Aldea M, Grau J, et al; PROCOLON research group (all members of this group are listed in Author Note). Evaluating the appropriateness of a community pharmacy model for a colorectal cancer screening program in Catalonia (Spain). J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2017; 23(1): 26–32.
28. Downey VA, Brock C. Extensions of Preventive Health in Addition to the Healthcare Provider. South Med J. 2023; 116(4): 341–344.
29. Eades CE, Ferguson JS, O’Carroll RE. Public health in community pharmacy: a systematic review of pharmacist and consumer views. BMC Public Health. 2011; 11 : 582.
30. Karen I. Svačina Š. Doporučený postup: Diabetes mellitus. Společnost všeobecného lékařství ČLS JEP. Centrum doporučených postupů pro praktické lékaře. Praha: 2020.
31. ČSÚ. Demografická ročenka České republiky – 2025. Praha: 25. 2. 2026.
32. OECD. Does healthcare deliver? Results from the Patient-Reported Indicator Surveys (PaRIS). Paris: OECD Publishing, 2025 (online). Dostupné z: https://doi.org/10.1787/c8af05a5-en [cit. 2026-03-22].
Don‘t have an account? Create new account
Enter the email address that you registered with. We will send you instructions on how to set a new password.
