IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v138y2023ics0168851023002269.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘Accident and emergency’? Exploring the reasons for increased privatisation in England's NHS

Author

Listed:
  • Goodair, Benjamin

Abstract

England's NHS is experiencing rising privatisation as services are increasingly being delivered by private healthcare providers. This has led to concerns about the supposed benefit of this process on healthcare quality but the reasons for the increase – and whether processes prioritise quality – are not well understood. In-depth semi-structured interviews with 20 people involved in the commissioning process, sampled from 3 commissioning sites (regional health boards) are thematically analysed. Four key themes of reasons for outsourcing were identified: unmet need; the “choice agenda”; appetite for change amongst key individuals working at the commissioning body; and the impact of financial pressures. The study concludes that the experience of commissioners navigating the provision of healthcare with worsening social determinants of health and financial austerity means that decisions to use private providers based on anticipated quality are sometimes but not always possible - sometimes they constitute ‘accidents’, sometimes ‘emergencies’.

Suggested Citation

  • Goodair, Benjamin, 2023. "‘Accident and emergency’? Exploring the reasons for increased privatisation in England's NHS," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:138:y:2023:i:c:s0168851023002269
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2023.104941
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851023002269
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2023.104941?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:138:y:2023:i:c:s0168851023002269. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.