An article examined the evolving relationship between evidence and policy on patient and public involvement in health research, through a documentary analysis of policy documents published between 1991 and 2010.
Source: David Evans, 'Patient and public involvement in research in the English NHS: a documentary analysis of the complex interplay of evidence and policy', Evidence & Policy, Volume 10 Number 3
A report called for person centred care to become the central ambition for health reform in England, to improve the quality of life, health, and well-being of people, and the sustainability of care systems. It also discussed the potential contribution of the voluntary and community sector. Recommendations included: for a greater focus on preventive public health measures; to make people the centre of reform, with 'what matters to people' forming one of the key organizing principles for services; for better support and shared decision making for people with chronic conditions and disabilities; for recognition of the role of carers, volunteers, engaged citizens, and the voluntary and community sector, with better support and investment; for better funding for health and social care; and for an end to top-down reorganizations of services.
Source: Person Centred Care 2020: Calls and contributions from health and social care charities, National Voices
NHS England began consultation on proposals for a new information standard for health and social care organizations in England, aimed at ensuring that patients and service users, and their carers and parents, could understand the information they were given. The consultation would close on 9 November 2014.
Source: Making Health and Social Care Information Accessible: Consultation document summer/autumn 2014, NHS England
A think-tank paper summarized themes of the existing debates regarding change in the National Health Service in England. It discussed the ways in which change could be taken forward, how solutions could be related to public behaviour, and the nature of communications and public debate about the National Health Service. The paper argued for the de-politicization of the debate, for greater public involvement in decision-making, and for a range of recommendations that included 'payment by results' for people's behavioural change and a strategic network of specialized and general hospitals.
Source: Julia Manning and Gail Beer, Healthcare and the Economy 2: Going with the flow, 2020health
A think-tank report said that the National Health Service in England was at a critical juncture, where reduced funding and increasing service demands meant that the existing system was unsustainable. It said that neither greater privatization nor further state control alone would be a practical solution, and argued that health mutuals, owned exclusively by patients, would be able to provide whole-person, joined up care, and would improve the patient experience, improve health outcomes, and be more cost effective. The report made a range of recommendations, including: for an independent review of patient engagement; for a pilot scheme for the proposed model of healthcare commissioning; for a revised role for Monitor and the health service regulator; for engagement of the health sector with friendly societies; and for a new patient right to holistic care.
Source: Mo Girach, Karol Sikora, and Adam Wildman, Power to the People: The mutual future of our National Health Service, ResPublica
An article examined the impacts of user involvement in mental health, drawing on a study of three National Health Service foundation trusts in the United Kingdom. It said that change in the NHS and in social care had altered what service users and their organizations could achieve, but service user involvement had become embedded into the new systems. It said that 'traditional' styles of confrontation and campaigning had given way to more corporate and professional modes, but this posed many challenges for organizations. 'Ordinary' service users were found to have some involvement in service planning and delivery and were supported by staff. In addition, it said that new opportunities and forums had arisen for user involvement, including the possibilities for involvement in NHS foundation trusts, but issues of appropriate styles of behaviour and negotiation arose. The article noted the potential for personalization to offer service users more control of their own care, but the study found little evidence that this was happening and there was uncertainty and confusion surrounding its development. The authors recommended further research on the applicability of personalization to the field of mental health.
Source: Diana Rose, Marian Barnes, Mike Crawford, Edward Omeni, Dee MacDonald, and Aaron Wilson, 'How do managers and leaders in the National Health Service and social care respond to service user involvement in mental health services in both its traditional and emergent forms? The ENSUE study', Health Services and Delivery Research, Volume 2 Issue 10
An article examined user involvement in mental health services in the United Kingdom, focusing on the power over discourse. It said that, although there were opportunities for 'discursive contestation' in mental health service development, the ways in which these opportunities emerged meant that the potentially transformative influence was nullified, and the process further marginalized women service users and other groups. The article considered the implications for the development of user involvement in service commissioning.
Source: Lydia Lewis, 'User involvement in mental health services: a case of power over discourse', Sociological Research Online, Volume 19 Issue 1