scholarly journals Divided by choice? For‐profit providers, patient choice and mechanisms of patient sorting in the English National Health Service

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 820-839
Author(s):  
Walter Beckert ◽  
Elaine Kelly
2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 343-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gwyn Bevan ◽  
Wynand P. M. M. van de Ven

AbstractIn the 1990s, countries experimented with two models of health care reforms based on choice of provider and insurer. The governments of the UK, Italy, Sweden and New Zealand introduced relatively quickly ‘internal market’ models into their single-payer systems, to transform hierarchies into markets by separating ‘purchasers’ from ‘providers’, and enabling ‘purchasers’ to contract selectively with competing public and private providers so that ‘money followed the patient’. This model has largely been abandoned where it has been tried. England, however, has implemented a modified ‘internal market’ model emphasising patient choice, which has so far had disappointing results. In the Netherlands, it took nearly 20 years to implement successfully the model in which enrollees choose among multiple insurers; but these insurers have so far only realised in part their potential to contract selectively with competing providers. The paper discusses the difficulties of implementing these different models and what England and the Netherlands can learn from each other. This includes exploration, as a thought experiment, of how choice of purchaser might be introduced into the English National Health Service based on lessons from the Netherlands.


2016 ◽  
Vol 106 (11) ◽  
pp. 3521-3557 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Gaynor ◽  
Carol Propper ◽  
Stephan Seiler

Choice in public services is controversial. We exploit a reform in the English National Health Service to assess the effect of removing constraints on patient choice. We estimate a demand model that explicitly captures the removal of the choice constraints imposed on patients. We find that, post-removal, patients became more responsive to clinical quality. This led to a modest reduction in mortality and a substantial increase in patient welfare. The elasticity of demand faced by hospitals increased substantially post-reform and we find evidence that hospitals responded to the enhanced incentives by improving quality. This suggests greater choice can raise quality. (JEL D12, I11, I18)


Author(s):  
Russell Mannion ◽  
Huw Davies ◽  
Stephen Harrison ◽  
Frederick Konteh ◽  
Rowena Jacobs ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 479-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Lewis

A new political consensus has emerged over the benefits of new rights for patients to choose their provider of elective health care in the English National Health Service. From December 2005, patients will be able to select from a number of alternative providers at the time they are referred for treatment. In the longer term, patients will be able to access care at any public or private provider that meets national quality and cost standards. The government intends that this policy will lead to improvements in the quality and efficiency of health care and will reduce levels of inequity among patients. Pilot schemes have shown that a majority of patients will exercise a choice of provider when this is offered. However, the policy of patient choice may involve significant costs to the NHS and may be more difficult to implement outside urban areas. Further, the information needed to support patients' choices is not yet available. Whether such a policy will increase or decrease levels of equity in the English NHS remains open to debate.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document