Location of Repository

Public health governance and primary care delivery : a triangulated study.

By L. Marks, S. Cave, D.J. Hunter, J.M. Mason, S. Peckham, A. Wallace, A. Mason, H. Weatherly and K. Melvin

Abstract

The government is committed to improving health and well-being and tackling health inequalities. PCTs and other commissioners are charged with maximising health improvement for their local populations, working in partnership. However, the effectiveness of a local public health system in addressing these tasks is influenced by how far PCTs and other commissioners prioritise public health in the context of a complex web of incentives and governance arrangements, some of which may conflict. In contrast with other forms of governance, such as clinical governance, the concept of public health governance and what counts as success or failure in this respect is poorly developed. \ud \ud The first part of this study will scope dimensions of public health governance and map incentives and governance arrangements for health improvement at national level. We will choose ten PCTs for detailed study, exploring the impact of financial (and other) incentives and governance arrangements on commissioning priorities and on the health improvement activities of practices, using a combination of interviews and documentary analysis. Views over how best to achieve public involvement and accountability in relation to effective stewardship of public health will be explored through interviews in our case study sites. We will supplement our local case studies with a national survey of key stakeholders in PCTs and two focus groups, one at national and the other at regional level.\ud \ud The research will be of benefit in identifying incentives (and barriers) to prioritising investment in health and well-being and in clarifying the role of the public in public health governance

Topics: Health improvement, Health inequality, Public health Governance, Targets, Commissioning, Local level, Incentives, Governance structures, Partnerships, PCTs.
Publisher: National Institute for Health Research
Year: 2011
OAI identifier: oai:dro.dur.ac.uk.OAI2:7978

Suggested articles

Preview

Citations

  1. (2007). Assessing the challenges of applying standard methods of economic evaluation. York: Public Health Research Consortium;
  2. (1976). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value trade-offs.
  3. (1984). Economic evaluation of health care in developing countries: theory and applications. London: Croom Helm;
  4. (2007). Multi-criteria decision analysis-a new approach to an old problem. Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety
  5. (2009). Predictive modelling – the future of acute health care demand across NHS South of Tyne and Wear;
  6. (2008). Prioritising investments in public health. Report for the Department of Health.
  7. Technical briefing: Disease prevalence modelling at practice level. Eastern Region Public Health Observatory;2009.
  8. (2008). The burden of disease and illness in the UK: A preliminary assessment to inform the development of UK Health Research and Development Priorities. Oxford Health care Associates;
  9. (2000). Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ
  10. (2006). Using economic analyses for local priority-setting: the population cost-impact approach. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.