The paradox of promoting choice in a collectivist system

Does free choice of hospital conflict with equity of access to highly specialized hospitals? A case study from the Danish health care system

Equity of access to health care is a central objective of European health care systems. In this study, we examined whether free choice of hospital, which has been introduced in many systems to strengthen user rights and improve hospital competition, conflicts with equity of access to highly specialized hospitals. We chose to carry out a study on 134,049 women who had uncomplicated pregnancies from 2005 to 2014 in Denmark because of their homogeneity in terms of need, the availability of behavioral data, and their expected engagement in choice of hospital. Multivariate logistic regression was used to link the dependent variable of bypassing the nearest non-highly specialized public hospital in order to "up-specialize", with independent variables related to socioeconomic status, risk attitude, and choice premises, using administrative registries. Overall, 16,426 (12%) women were observed to bypass the nearest hospital to up-specialize. Notably, high education level was significantly associated with up-specialization, with an odds ratio of 1.50 (95% CI: 1.40-1.60, p < 0.001) compared to low education group. This confirms our hypothesis that there is a socioeconomic gradient in terms of exercising the right to a free choice of hospital, and so the results indicate that the policy exacerbates inequity of access to health care.

The advantages and disadvantages of encouraging consumerist notions of health care at two minor injury units

Over the past four decades, UK governments have moved towards an increasingly pro-market model of healthcare provision. Under this system, patients are not only encouraged, but expected, to take increasing responsibility for healthcare decision-making and the risks that it might entail. This article investigate how and why patients make choices about their health care and how service providers help facilitate this. Between October 2014 and May 2015, the researcher was embedded as an emergency nurse practitioner at two minor injury units in order to undertake direct and participant observation. During this time, 40 patients, 17 service providers and 1 senior manager also consented to semi-structured interview. The findings suggest that patients should continue to be encouraged to make decisions about their health care, but only if they feel confident to do so. The challenge for service providers is to recognise when this is or is not appropriate and tailor interaction accordingly.

The paradox of non-evidence based, publicly funded complementary alternative medicine in the English National Health Service: An explanation

Despite the unproven effectiveness of many practices that are under the umbrella term 'complementary alternative medicine' (CAM), there is provision of CAM within the English National Health Service (NHS). Moreover, although the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence was established to promote scientifically validated medicine in the NHS, the paradox of publicly funded, non-evidence based CAM can be explained as linked with government policy of patient choice and specifically patient treatment choice. Patient choice is useful in the political and policy discourse as it is open to different interpretations and can be justified by policy-makers who rely on the traditional NHS values of equity and universality. Treatment choice finds expression in the policy of personalised healthcare linked with patient responsibilisation which finds resonance in the emphasis CAM places on self-care and self-management. More importantly, however, policy-makers also use patient choice and treatment choice as a policy initiative with the objective of encouraging destabilisation of the entrenched healthcare institutions and practices considered resistant to change. This political strategy of system reform has the unintended, paradoxical consequence of allowing for the emergence of non-evidence based, publicly funded CAM in the NHS. The political and policy discourse of patient choice thus trumps evidence based medicine, with patients that demand access to CAM becoming the unwitting beneficiaries.

Patients' experience of being triaged directly to a psychologist in primary care: a qualitative study

Background

In a primary health-care centre (PHCC) situated in a segregated area with low socio-economic status, ‘primary care triage’ has increased efficiency and accessibility. In the primary-care triage, the nurse sorts the patient to the appropriate PHCC profession according to described symptoms.

Aim

The aim of this study was to examine the patients’ experience of being triaged directly to a psychologist for assessment.

Method

Interviews were conducted with 20 patients and then analysed using qualitative content analysis.

Findings

The results show that patients contacting the PHCC for mental health issues often are active agents with their own intent to see a psychologist, not a doctor, as a first-hand choice when contacting the PHCC. Seeking help for mental health issues is described as a sensitive issue that demands building up strength before contacting. The quick access to the preferred health-care professional is appreciated. The nurse was perceived as a caring facilitator rather than a decision maker. It is the patient's wish rather than the symptoms that directs the sorting. The patients’ expectations when meeting the psychologist were wide and diverse. The structured assessment sometimes collided and sometimes united with these expectations, yielding different outcome satisfaction. The results could be seen in line with the present goal to increase patients’ choice in the health-care system. The improved accessibility to the psychologist seems to meet community expectations. The results also indicate a need for providing more prior information about the assessment and potential outcomes.

Does hospital competition harm equity? Evidence from the English National Health Service

Increasing evidence shows that hospital competition under fixed prices can improve quality and reduce cost. Concerns remain, however, that competition may undermine socio-economic equity in the utilisation of care. We test this hypothesis in the context of the pro-competition reforms of the English National Health Service progressively introduced from 2004 to 2006. We use a panel of 32,482 English small areas followed from 2003 to 2008 and a difference in differences approach. The effect of competition on equity is identified by the interaction between market structure, small area income deprivation and year. We find a negative association between market competition and elective admissions in deprived areas. The effect of pro-competition reform was to reduce this negative association slightly, suggesting that competition did not undermine equity.

Effects of the Blair/Brown NHS reforms on socioeconomic equity in health care

The central objectives of the 'Blair/Brown' reforms of the English NHS in the 2000s were to reduce hospital waiting times and improve the quality of care. However, critics raised concerns that the choice and competition elements of reform might undermine socioeconomic equity in health care. By contrast, the architects of reform predicted that accelerated growth in NHS spending combined with increased patient choice of hospital would enhance equity for poorer patients. This paper draws together and discusses the findings of three large-scale national studies designed to shed empirical light on this issue. Study one developed methods for monitoring change in neighbourhood level socioeconomic equity in the utilization of health care, and found no substantial change in equity between 2001-02 and 2008-09 for non-emergency hospital admissions, outpatient admissions (from 2004-05) and a basket of specific hospital procedures (hip replacement, senile cataract, gastroscopy and coronary revascularization). Study two found that increased competition between 2003-04 and 2008-09 had no substantial effect on socioeconomic equity in health care. Study three found that potential incentives for public hospitals to select against socioeconomically-disadvantaged hip replacement patients were small, compared with incentives to select against elderly and co-morbid patients. Taken together, these findings suggest that the Blair/Brown reforms had little effect on socioeconomic equity in health care. This may be because the 'dose' of competition was small and most hospital services continued to be provided by public hospitals which did not face strong incentives to select against socioeconomically-disadvantaged patients.

The impact of patient choice of provider on equity: Analysis of a patient survey

Objectives

To understand the impact on equity of giving patients a choice of provider.

Methods

A postal survey of 5997 patients in four areas of England about choice at their recent referral and, using a discrete choice experiment, how they would choose in hypothetical situations. Binary logistic regression and a series of multinomial and nested logit models were used to analyse the data to discover whether patients with particular characteristics were more likely to: think choice is important; be offered a choice; and, choose a non-local provider.

Results

The response rate was 36%. Choice was more important to older patients aged 51-80 years, patients from non-white backgrounds, women, those with no qualifications and those with a bad past experience of their local hospital. There were no significant differences in who was offered a choice in terms of education, age group or ethnicity. In both real and hypothetical situations patients with no formal qualifications and those living in urban centres were more likely to choose their local hospital, and patients with a bad or mixed past experience at the local hospital were more likely to choose an alternative. In hypothetical choices those who do not normally travel by car and without Internet access were more likely to choose their local hospital irrespective of that hospital's characteristics.

Conclusions

More educated, affluent patients were no more likely to be offered a choice than other population groups, but there does appear to be a social gradient in who chose to travel beyond the local area for treatment. If these results were replicated across England, there is at least the potential risk that when local hospitals are failing, patient choice could result in inequitable access to high quality care, rather than enhancing equity as the policy's architects had hoped.

Patient choice and equity in the British National Health Service: towards developing an alternative framework

Choice and competition have been phased into many public health systems with the aim of achieving various and potentially exclusive goals such as improving efficiency, quality and responsiveness to users' needs. Yet their use to promote equity of access as evidenced recently in the British National Health Service (the NHS) is unprecedented. Giving users the power of exit over unresponsive providers is meant to address the failures of previous policies. This paper shows that there is a potential conflict between choice and equity, in terms of both the values and the outcomes each policy is likely to produce. Using a multidisciplinary and multidimensional framework, drawn from Bourdieusian sociology, feminist theory and economics, the study highlights the implications of the simplistic and one-sided conception of individual patient choice in relation to equity. It also uses the existing evidence on the impact of market competition and choice, in the UK and elsewhere, to emphasise the importance of socio-economic and psycho-social factors, which are left out of current policy considerations.

Why do public policies fail so often? Exploring health policy-making as an imaginary and symbolic construction

Although it is widely accepted that public policies are difficult to implement, most analyses of policy failures are conceived of as predominantly rational processes. This article questions that assumption by introducing ideas of a desiring subject and socio-symbolic order drawn from Lacanian psychoanalytic theory to suggest that public policies are also a product of social fantasy, and to draw attention to the implications of this unrecognized function of policy-making. It also employs the idea of defensive splitting borrowed from Kleinian object relations theory to explain the difficulty of translating policy into public organizations, which have to perform often conflicting societal tasks. The example of patient choice in the UK National Health Service (the NHS) is used to illustrate theoretical arguments and to propose an alternative understanding of public policy-making by way of bridging fantasy with reality.

Equity, waiting times, and NHS reforms: retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether observable changes in waiting times occurred for certain key elective procedures between 1997 and 2007 in the English National Health Service and to analyse the distribution of those changes between socioeconomic groups as an indicator of equity.

DESIGN

Retrospective study of population-wide, patient level data using ordinary least squares regression to investigate the statistical relation between waiting times and patients' socioeconomic status.

SETTING

English NHS from 1997 to 2007.

PARTICIPANTS

427,277 patients who had elective knee replacement, 406,253 who had elective hip replacement, and 2,568,318 who had elective cataract repair.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Days waited from referral for surgery to surgery itself; socioeconomic status based on Carstairs index of deprivation.

RESULTS

Mean and median waiting times rose initially and then fell steadily over time. By 2007 variation in waiting times across the population tended to be lower. In 1997 waiting times and deprivation tended to be positively related. By 2007 the relation between deprivation and waiting time was less pronounced, and, in some cases, patients from the most deprived fifth were waiting less time than patients from the most advantaged fifth.

CONCLUSIONS

Between 1997 and 2007 waiting times for patients having elective hip replacement, knee replacement, and cataract repair in England went down and the variation in waiting times for those procedures across socioeconomic groups was reduced. Many people feared that the government's NHS reforms would lead to inequity, but inequity with respect to waiting times did not increase; if anything, it decreased. Although proving that the later stages of those reforms, which included patient choice, provider competition, and expanded capacity, was a catalyst for improvements in equity is impossible, the data show that these reforms, at a minimum, did not harm equity.

Market-oriented, demand-driven health care reforms and equity in health and health care utilization in Sweden

In international comparisons, the Swedish health care system has been seen to perform well. In recent years, market-oriented, demand-driven health care reforms aimed at free choice of provider by patients and free establishment of doctors are increasingly promoted in Sweden. The stated objective is to improve access and efficiency in health services and to provide more and/or better services for the money. Swedish health policy aims to provide equal access to care, based on equal need. However, the social and economic gradient in disease and ill health does not translate into the same social and economic gradient in demand for health services. A market-oriented, demand-driven health care system runs the risk of defeating the health policy aims and of further increasing gaps between social groups in access and utilization of health care services, to the detriment of those with greater needs, unless it is coupled with need-based allocation of resources and empowerment of these groups.

Access to health care services – an English policy perspective

The English government has given a commitment to improving access to health care services for particular groups perceived as being under-served, or served inappropriately, by existing services. In this article four examples of policies aimed at improving access are considered: enhancing the supply of services to under-served areas, changing the organization of services, setting targets to improve access, and empowering people to make choices. Policies aimed at improving access will work only if they address the source of inequities, which means identifying the key barriers to access and these barriers are unlikely to be uniform across sectors, services, and groups of people. Evidence on the success of these four types of intervention in terms of influencing access and equity of access is discussed, borrowing some concepts from the sociological literature that enable us to understand the importance of how barriers to access may arise for different services and different population groups. It is clear that some policies may not work as well as we would hope, or may even exacerbate inequities of access, because they fail to recognize the source of the particular barriers faced by some groups.

What benefits will choice bring to patients? Literature review and assessment of implications

Objectives

To assess the demand for, and likely impact of, increasing patient choice in health care. The study examined whether patients would like to exercise choice of hospital, primary care provider and treatment, and investigated the likely impact of policies designed to increase choice on equity of access, and on the efficiency and quality of service delivery.

Method

Theory-based literature review including an analysis of the intended and unintended impact of choice-related policies in health care in the UK, European Union and USA. Selected papers focused not only on offering choice to individual patients but also evidence of the impact of choice by patients’ agents such as GPs, and on the impact of introducing choice in education and social services.

Results

Choosing between hospitals or primary care providers is not currently a high priority for the public, except where local services are poor, e.g. they have long waiting times and where individual patients’ circumstances do not limit their ability to travel. When patients become ill, they are increasingly likely to wish to rely on a trusted health practitioner to choose their treatment. Better educated populations make greater use of information and are more likely to exercise choice in health care. The increase in inequality which this could produce might be reduced by specific provision of information and help, enabling less advantaged populations to make choices about health care. There was little evidence in the literature that providing greater choice will in itself improve efficiency or quality of care.

Conclusion

Although patients may themselves make limited use of choices, the existence of choice may, in theory, stimulate providers to improve quality of care. Patients do, however, want to be more involved in individual decisions about their own treatment, and generally participate much less in these decisions than they would wish.