4.1 Article

Major health service transformation and the public voice: conflict, challenge or complicity?

期刊

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/1355819617728530

关键词

health service transformation; patient and public involvement; representativeness

资金

  1. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care East Midlands (CLAHRC EM)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives Calls for major reconfigurations of health services have been accompanied by recommendations that wide ranging stakeholders be involved. In particular, patients and the wider public are seen as critical contributors as both funders and beneficiaries of public health care. But public involvement is fraught with challenges, and little research has focused on involvement in the health service transformation initiatives. This paper examines the design and function of public involvement in reconfiguration of health services within the English NHS. Methods Qualitative data including interviews, observation and documents were collected in two health service transformation' programmes; interviews include involved public and professional participants. Data were analysed using parallel deductive and inductive approaches. Results Public involvement in the programmes was extensive but its terms of reference, and the individuals involved, were restricted by policy pressures and programme objectives. The degree to which participants descriptively or substantively represented the wider public was limited; participants sought to speak for' this public but their views on what was acceptable' and likely to influence decision-making led them to constrain their contributions. Conclusions Public involvement in two major service reconfiguration programmes in England was seen as important and functional, and could not be characterized as tokenistic. Yet involvement in these programmes fell short of normative ideals, and could inadvertently reduce, rather than enlarge, public influence on health service reconfiguration decisions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据