IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Value for money in the English NHS: Summary of the evidence

Listed author(s):
  • Stephen Martin

    (Department of Economics, University of York)

  • Peter C Smith


    (Centre for Health Economics, University of York)

  • Sheila Leatherman

    (School of Public Health, University of North Carolina)

The extent to which the English National Health Service secures value for money for taxpayers has become a central issue of political and public debate. Questions include: how much expenditure growth has been made available to the NHS? on what has that money been spent? what improvements in the volume and quality of health care have been secured? and what are the implications for productivity? There has been a flurry of research activity designed to address these and similar questions. This report seeks to bring together this research in a concise format and draws some tentative conclusions about recent productivity changes in the NHS. It finds that there is considerable evidence of growth in both the volume and quality of NHS activity. However, this has not in general kept pace with the growth in expenditure. On most measures, therefore, NHS productivity is either static or declining. However, the report highlights a large number of unresolved methodological issues that make it hard to draw any definitive conclusions. We conclude that the measurement of NHS productivity change makes an important contribution to national debate. However, there remains considerable scope for improving both the data and the methods underlying current estimates.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
File Function: First version, 2006
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Centre for Health Economics, University of York in its series Working Papers with number 018cherp.

in new window

Length: 30 pages
Date of creation: Jul 2006
Handle: RePEc:chy:respap:18cherp
Contact details of provider: Postal:
York Y010 5DD

Phone: (01904) 321401
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

in new window

  1. Hugh Gravelle & Dave Smith, 2001. "Discounting for health effects in cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(7), pages 587-599.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:chy:respap:18cherp. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Frances Sharp)

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.