Who owns and operates healthcare providers and does it matter?

NHS Confederation, 29 Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DD, UK.
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine (Impact Factor: 2.12). 03/2008; 101(2):54-8. DOI: 10.1258/jrsm.2007.070400
Source: PubMed

Full-text preview

Available from:
  • Source

    Full-text · Article · Jun 2008 · Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess the impact of provider diversity on quality and innovation in the English NHS by mapping the extent of diverse provider activity and identifying the differences in performance between Third Sector Organisations (TSOs), for-profit private enterprises, and incumbent organizations within the NHS, and the factors that affect the entry and growth of new providers. Case studies of four local health economies. Data included: semi-structured interviews with 48 managerial and clinical staff from NHS organizations and providers from the private and third sector; some documentary evidence; a focus group with service users; and routine data from the Care Quality Commission and Companies House. Data collection was mainly between November 2008 and November 2009. Involvement of diverse providers in the NHS is limited. Commissioners' local strategies influence degrees of diversity. Barriers to entry for TSOs include lack of economies of scale in the bidding process. Private providers have greater concern to improve patient pathways and patient experience, whereas TSOs deliver quality improvements by using a more holistic approach and a greater degree of community involvement. Entry of new providers drives NHS trusts to respond by making improvements. Information sharing diminishes as competition intensifies. There is scope to increase the participation of diverse providers in the NHS but care must be taken not to damage public accountability, overall productivity, equity and NHS providers (especially acute hospitals, which are likely to remain in the NHS) in the process.
    No preview · Article · Sep 2011 · Journal of Health Services Research & Policy
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The debate on privatisation is central to social policy, yet it tends to generate more heat than light as definitions and operationalisations of ‘privatisation’ are often implicit, unclear and conflicting. This paper aims to explore the extent of privatisation in the NHS over three periods of government through the lens of three approaches of Mixed Economy of Welfare, Wheels of Welfare and Publicness. All have two dimensions of provision and finance in common, but Mixed Economy of Welfare and Publicness stress the third dimension, that of regulation, while Wheels of Welfare stresses decision. All three approaches agree that some policies in the NHS constitute privatisation, but there is some disagreement largely stemming from their differential stress on regulation or decision. It is important to introduce a degree of transparency in the debate which provides clear definitions and rationales. However, all approaches require further development which focuses on the important but neglected point of how different types of privatisation lead to different impacts on patients.
    No preview · Article · Jul 2014 · Journal of Social Policy