Literature DB >> 19719537

Patient participation in collective healthcare decision making: the Dutch model.

Hester M van de Bovenkamp1, Margo J Trappenburg, Kor J Grit.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To study whether the Dutch participation model is a good model of participation.
BACKGROUND: Patient participation is on the agenda, both on the individual and the collective level. In this study, we focus on the latter by looking at the Dutch model in which patient organizations are involved in many formal decision-making processes. This model can be described as neo-corporatist.
DESIGN: We did 52 interviews with actors in the healthcare field, 35 of which were interviews with representatives of patient organizations and 17 with actors that involved patient organizations in their decision making.
RESULTS: Dutch patient organizations have many opportunities to participate in formal healthcare decision making and, as a result, have become institutionalized. Although there were several examples identified in which patient organizations were able to influence decision making, patient organizations remain in a dependent position, which they try to overcome through professionalization. DISCUSSION: Although this model of participation gives patient organizations many opportunities to participate, it also causes important tensions. Many organizations cannot cope with all the participation possibilities attributed to them. This participation abundance can therefore cause redistribution effects. Furthermore, their dependent position leads to the danger of being put to instrumental use. Moreover, professionalization causes tensions concerning empowerment possibilities and representativeness. Conclusion Although the Dutch model tries to make patient organizations an equal party in healthcare decision making, this goal is not reached in practice. It is therefore important to study more closely which subjects patients can and should contribute to, and in what way.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19719537      PMCID: PMC5060518          DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00567.x

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


  27 in total

Review 1.  Acknowledging the expertise of patients and their organisations.

Authors:  J Wilson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-09-18

2.  Setting biomedical research priorities: justice, science, and public participation.

Authors:  D Resnik
Journal:  Kennedy Inst Ethics J       Date:  2001-06

Review 3.  Consumer involvement in health research: a review and research agenda.

Authors:  Jonathan Boote; Rosemary Telford; Cindy Cooper
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 2.980

4.  Participation in health impact assessment: objectives, methods and core values.

Authors:  John Wright; Jayne Parry; Jonathan Mathers
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2005-01-21       Impact factor: 9.408

5.  Patients and professionals as research partners: challenges, practicalities, and benefits.

Authors:  Sarah Hewlett; Maarten de Wit; Pam Richards; Enid Quest; Rod Hughes; Turid Heiberg; John Kirwan
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2006-08-15

6.  Pharmaceuticals and the consumer movement: the ambivalences of 'patient power'.

Authors:  Hans Lofgren
Journal:  Aust Health Rev       Date:  2004-11-08       Impact factor: 1.990

Review 7.  Bridging the gap. The separate worlds of evidence-based medicine and patient-centered medicine.

Authors:  J Bensing
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2000-01

Review 8.  Patient accountability and quality of care: lessons from medical consumerism and the patients' rights, women's health and disability rights movements.

Authors:  M A Rodwin
Journal:  Am J Law Med       Date:  1994

9.  Health consumer groups in the UK: a new social movement?

Authors:  Judith Allsop; Kathryn Jones; Rob Baggott
Journal:  Sociol Health Illn       Date:  2004-09

10.  Engaging health care consumers to improve the quality of care.

Authors:  Judith H Hibbard
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  46 in total

1.  The ideal of biopsychosocial chronic care: how to make it real? A qualitative study among Dutch stakeholders.

Authors:  Anneke van Dijk-de Vries; Albine Moser; Vera-Christina Mertens; Jikke van der Linden; Trudy van der Weijden; Jacques Th M van Eijk
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2012-03-12       Impact factor: 2.497

2.  Mutual powerlessness in client participation practices in mental health care.

Authors:  Tineke Broer; Anna P Nieboer; Roland Bal
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  (Un)organizing equal collaboration between users and professionals: on management of patient education in Norway.

Authors:  Roar Stokken
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-05-30       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  Stakeholder Coalitions and Priorities Around the Policy Goals of a Nation-Wide Mental Health Care Reform.

Authors:  Pierre Smith; Pablo Nicaise; Sophie Thunus; Inge Neyens; Carole Walker; Vincent Lorant
Journal:  Adm Policy Ment Health       Date:  2021-01-01

Review 5.  What is the evidence base for public involvement in health-care policy?: results of a systematic scoping review.

Authors:  Annalijn Conklin; Zoë Morris; Ellen Nolte
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Representing Whom? U.K. Health Consumer and Patients' Organizations in the Policy Process.

Authors:  Rob Baggott; Kathryn L Jones
Journal:  J Bioeth Inq       Date:  2018-05-25       Impact factor: 1.352

7.  Assessing Patient Participation in Health Policy Decision-Making in Cyprus.

Authors:  Kyriakos Souliotis; Eirini Agapidaki; Lily Evangelia Peppou; Chara Tzavara; George Samoutis; Mamas Theodorou
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2016-08-01

8.  Aiming for inclusion: a case study of motivations for involvement in mental health-care governance by ethnic minority users.

Authors:  Cláudia de Freitas
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-05-27       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  Do not forget the professional--the value of the FIRST model for guiding the structural involvement of patients in rheumatology research.

Authors:  Maarten P T de Wit; Janneke E Elberse; Jacqueline E W Broerse; Tineke A Abma
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-01-31       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  An empirical study of patient participation in guideline development: exploring the potential for articulating patient knowledge in evidence-based epistemic settings.

Authors:  Hester M van de Bovenkamp; Teun Zuiderent-Jerak
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-05-02       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.