Search results

1 – 5 of 5
Content available
Article
Publication date: 22 November 2018

Peter Littlejohns, Katharina Kieslich, Albert Weale, Emma Tumilty, Georgina Richardson, Tim Stokes, Robin Gauld and Paul Scuffham

In order to create sustainable health systems, many countries are introducing ways to prioritise health services underpinned by a process of health technology assessment…

Abstract

Purpose

In order to create sustainable health systems, many countries are introducing ways to prioritise health services underpinned by a process of health technology assessment. While this approach requires technical judgements of clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness, these are embedded in a wider set of social (societal) value judgements, including fairness, responsiveness to need, non-discrimination and obligations of accountability and transparency. Implementing controversial decisions faces legal, political and public challenge. To help generate acceptance for the need for health prioritisation and the resulting decisions, the purpose of this paper is to develop a novel way of encouraging key stakeholders, especially patients and the public, to become involved in the prioritisation process.

Design/methodology/approach

Through a multidisciplinary collaboration involving a series of international workshops, ethical and political theory (including accountability for reasonableness) have been applied to develop a practical way forward through the creation of a values framework. The authors have tested this framework in England and in New Zealand using a mixed-methods approach.

Findings

A social values framework that consists of content and process values has been developed and converted into an online decision-making audit tool.

Research limitations/implications

The authors have developed an easy to use method to help stakeholders (including the public) to understand the need for prioritisation of health services and to encourage their involvement. It provides a pragmatic way of harmonising different perspectives aimed at maximising health experience.

Practical implications

All health care systems are facing increasing demands within finite resources. Although many countries are introducing ways to prioritise health services, the decisions often face legal, political, commercial and ethical challenge. The research will help health systems to respond to these challenges.

Social implications

This study helps in increasing public involvement in complex health challenges.

Originality/value

No other groups have used this combination of approaches to address this issue.

Details

Journal of Health Organization and Management, vol. 33 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1477-7266

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 15 August 2016

David James Hunter, Katharina Kieslich, Peter Littlejohns, Sophie Staniszewska, Emma Tumilty, Albert Weale and Iestyn Williams

The purpose of this paper is to reflect on the findings of this special issue and discusses the future challenges for policy, research and society. The findings suggest…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to reflect on the findings of this special issue and discusses the future challenges for policy, research and society. The findings suggest that challenges emerge as a result of legitimacy deficits of both consensus and contestatory modes of public involvement in health priority setting.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper draws on the discussions and findings presented in this special issue. It seeks to bring the country experiences and case studies together to draw conclusions for policy, research and society.

Findings

At least two recurring themes emerge. An underlying theme is the importance, but also the challenge, of establishing legitimacy in health priority setting. The country experiences suggest that we understand very little about the conditions under which representative, or authentic, participation generates legitimacy and under which it will be regarded as insufficient. A second observation is that public participation takes a variety of forms that depend on the opportunity structures in a given national context. Given this variety the conceptualization of public participation needs to be expanded to account for the many forms of public participation.

Originality/value

The paper concludes that the challenges of public involvement are closely linked to the question of how legitimate processes and decisions can be generated in priority setting. This suggests that future research must focus more narrowly on conditions under which legitimacy are generated in order to expand the understanding of public involvement in health prioritization.

Details

Journal of Health Organization and Management, vol. 30 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1477-7266

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 15 August 2016

Jean Slutsky, Emma Tumilty, Catherine Max, Lanting Lu, Sripen Tantivess, Renata Curi Hauegen, Jennifer A Whitty, Albert Weale, Steven D Pearson, Aviva Tugendhaft, Hufeng Wang, Sophie Staniszewska, Krisantha Weerasuriya, Jeonghoon Ahn and Leonardo Cubillos

The paper summarizes data from 12 countries, chosen to exhibit wide variation, on the role and place of public participation in the setting of priorities. The purpose of…

Abstract

Purpose

The paper summarizes data from 12 countries, chosen to exhibit wide variation, on the role and place of public participation in the setting of priorities. The purpose of this paper is to exhibit cross-national patterns in respect of public participation, linking those differences to institutional features of the countries concerned.

Design/methodology/approach

The approach is an example of case-orientated qualitative assessment of participation practices. It derives its data from the presentation of country case studies by experts on each system. The country cases are located within the historical development of democracy in each country.

Findings

Patterns of participation are widely variable. Participation that is effective through routinized institutional processes appears to be inversely related to contestatory participation that uses political mobilization to challenge the legitimacy of the priority setting process. No system has resolved the conceptual ambiguities that are implicit in the idea of public participation.

Originality/value

The paper draws on a unique collection of country case studies in participatory practice in prioritization, supplementing existing published sources. In showing that contestatory participation plays an important role in a sub-set of these countries it makes an important contribution to the field because it broadens the debate about public participation in priority setting beyond the use of minipublics and the observation of public representatives on decision-making bodies.

Details

Journal of Health Organization and Management, vol. 30 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1477-7266

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 15 August 2016

Albert Weale, Katharina Kieslich, Peter Littlejohns, Aviva Tugendhaft, Emma Tumilty, Krisantha Weerasuriya and Jennifer A Whitty

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the special issue on improving equitable access to health care through increased public and patient involvement (PPI) in…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the special issue on improving equitable access to health care through increased public and patient involvement (PPI) in prioritization decisions by discussing the conceptualization, scope and rationales of PPI in priority setting that inform the special issue.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper employs a mixed-methods approach in that it provides a literature review and a conceptual discussion of the common themes emerging in the field of PPI and health priority setting.

Findings

The special issue focuses on public participation that is collective in character, in the sense that the participation relates to a social, not personal, decision and is relevant to whole groups of people and not single individuals. It is aimed at influencing a decision on public policy or legal rules. The rationales for public participation can be found in democratic theory, especially as they relate to the social and political values of legitimacy and representation.

Originality/value

The paper builds on previous definitions of public participation by underlining its collective character. In doing so, it develops the work by Parry, Moyser and Day by arguing that, in light of the empirical evidence presented in this issue, public participatory activities such as protests and demonstrations should no longer be labelled unconventional, but should instead be labelled as “contestatory participation”. This is to better reflect a situation in which these modes of participation have become more conventional in many parts of the world.

Details

Journal of Health Organization and Management, vol. 30 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1477-7266

Keywords

Abstract

Details

Journal of Health Organization and Management, vol. 30 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1477-7266

1 – 5 of 5