Healthcare choice: Discourses, perceptions, experiences and practices

Policy discourse shaped by neoliberal ideology, with its emphasis on marketisation and competition, has highlighted the importance of choice in the context of healthcare and health systems globally. Yet, evidence about how so-called consumers perceive and experience healthcare choice is in short supply and limited to specific healthcare systems, primarily in the Global North. This special issue aims to explore how choice is perceived and utilised in the context of different systems of healthcare throughout the world, where choice, at least in policy and organisational terms, has been embedded for some time. The articles are divided into those emphasising: embodiment and the meaning of choice; social processes associated with choice; the uncertainties, risks and trust involved in making choices; and issues of access and inequality associated with enacting choice. These sociological studies reveal complexities not always captured in policy discourse and suggest that the commodification of healthcare is particularly problematic

Who needs what from a national health research system: Lessons from reforms to the English Department of Health's R&D system

This article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund.Health research systems consist of diverse groups who have some role in health research, but the boundaries around such a system are not clear-cut. To explore what various stakeholders need we reviewed the literature including that on the history of English health R&D reforms, and we also applied some relevant conceptual frameworks. We first describe the needs and capabilities of the main groups of stakeholders in health research systems, and explain key features of policymaking systems within which these stakeholders operate in the UK. The five groups are policymakers (and health care managers), health professionals, patients and the general public, industry, and researchers. As individuals and as organisations they have a range of needs from the health research system, but should also develop specific capabilities in order to contribute effectively to the system and benefit from it. Second, we discuss key phases of reform in the development of the English health research system over four decades - especially that of the English Department of Health's R&D system - and identify how far legitimate demands of key stakeholder interests were addressed. Third, in drawing lessons we highlight points emerging from contemporary reports, but also attempt to identify issues through application of relevant conceptual frameworks. The main lessons are: the importance of comprehensively addressing the diverse needs of various interacting institutions and stakeholders; the desirability of developing facilitating mechanisms at interfaces between the health research system and its various stakeholders; and the importance of additional money in being able to expand the scope of the health research system whilst maintaining support for basic science. We conclude that the latest health R&D strategy in England builds on recent progress and tackles acknowledged weaknesses. The strategy goes a considerable way to identifying and more effectively meeting the needs of key groups such as medical academics, patients and industry, and has been remarkably successful in increasing the funding for health research. There are still areas that might benefit from further recognition and resourcing, but the lessons identified, and progress made by the reforms are relevant for the design and coordination of national health research systems beyond England.This article is available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund

From awareness to involvement? A qualitative study of respiratory patients’ awareness of health service change

Background  Despite the policy rhetoric, patient involvement in health service decisions remains limited. Highlighted barriers include a concern that most patients are unable to see beyond personal aspects of their care in order to contribute meaningfully to health service development, and a perception that professionals do not welcome patient involvement. Objectives  We aimed to explore respiratory patients’ awareness of changes in local health service provision and provide insight into health professionals’ attitudes to engaging patients. Methods  Nested within an ethnographic study of health service reconfiguration, we recruited 31 patients with a range of respiratory diseases from four case study areas in England and Wales. Data from telephone interviews, illness diaries and focus groups with patients, and interviews with health professionals and managers were transcribed and analysed using the Framework approach. Results  Participants were not only aware of trends in health service provision (e.g. emergence of new professional roles, shift from secondary to primary care) but interpreted changes in the light of local and national events. Despite this awareness, none of the patients was formally involved in service development, though some contributed to local voluntary groups. Professionals generally welcomed the need for patients’ views to be heard. Discussion and conclusions  Our data give grounds for optimism. Patients are aware of and interested in a broad range of health‐related issues. Professionals’ motivation to involve patients in service development may be underestimated. Although practical obstacles remain, our findings should encourage the ongoing search for effective models of promoting patient engagement in health‐care services

Out-of-hours care in West Kent

The provision of medical services outside of normal surgery hours was once considered a key feature of the general practitioner's duties. In recent years, however, there has been a fundamental shift in the organisation of 'out of hours' care. Research has shown a long-term trend towards increased patient demand, but a decline in GPs' willingness to provide that service personally. Many in the profession have questioned whether the increased volume of out of hours work reflects a growth in genuine health need, or, in unreasonable demand from patients