Literature DB >> 11493323

A 'Third Way' for lay involvement: what evidence so far?

S Pickard1, K Smith.   

Abstract

AIMS AND
OBJECTIVES: This article considers evidence regarding lay involvement in the NHS, following the White Paper's commitment to rebuild public confidence in an NHS 'accountable to patients and open to the public and shaped by their views'. It looks at two aspects of lay involvement: the lay board member's involvement in primary care group (PCG) decision-making and the engagement of the PCG with the wider public.
METHODS: The paper analyses data from the first sweep of the annual Tracker Survey of a sample of PCGs in England, led by the National Primary Care Research and Development Centre in collaboration with the King's Fund between September and December 1999. It draws specifically from the postal questionnaires sent to lay members. Firstly, however, it contextualizes this data by reviewing the history of lay involvement before 1997 in the NHS and particularly in primary care.
CONCLUSIONS: The paper concludes that, during the first 6 months of their operation, the lay voice was faintly heard in PCGs. The lay member's role in decision-making at board-level was peripheral. The majority rated their involvement in key aspects of decision-making as low and their influence on decision-making below that of other board members including the Chief Officer, the chair and the GP board members. Beyond the arena of the board, what little contact there was with the lay voice has taken the shape of informing rather than consulting. Mitigating factors include the early stage at which the survey was completed and the lack of precedents for lay involvement in primary care in a broad sense on which PCGs can draw.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11493323      PMCID: PMC5060065          DOI: 10.1046/j.1369-6513.2001.00131.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Expect        ISSN: 1369-6513            Impact factor:   3.377


  3 in total

1.  Public participation and marginalized groups: the community development model.

Authors:  Eileen O'Keefe; Christine Hogg
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Community and participation for general practice: perceptions of general practitioners and community nurses.

Authors:  I Brown
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  Patient participation in general practice: who participates?

Authors:  M Agass; A Coulter; D Mant; A Fuller
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 5.386

  3 in total
  7 in total

1.  'Taking off the suit': engaging the community in primary health care decision-making.

Authors:  Elizabeth Anderson; Michael Shepherd; Chris Salisbury
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Mission, margin, and the role of consumer governance in decision-making at community health centers.

Authors:  Brad Wright; Graham P Martin
Journal:  J Health Care Poor Underserved       Date:  2014-05

3.  What do patients want from high-quality general practice and how do we involve them in improvement?

Authors:  Angela Coulter; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  User involvement in clinical governance.

Authors:  Susan Pickard; Martin Marshall; Anne Rogers; Rod Sheaff; Bonnie Sibbald; Stephen Campbell; Shirley Halliwell; Martin Roland
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 5.  Supporting public involvement in interview and other panels: a systematic review.

Authors:  Susan Baxter; Mark Clowes; Delia Muir; Wendy Baird; Andrea Broadway-Parkinson; Carole Bennett
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Patient and public involvement facilitators: Could they be the key to the NHS quality improvement agenda?

Authors:  Sarah Todd; Christine Coupland; Raymond Randall
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2020-02-05       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  The 'nuts and bolts' of including service users and carers in the recruitment of health and social work students in an English university-An interdisciplinary critique.

Authors:  Peter Unwin; Joy Rooney
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 3.377

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.