Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore how healthcare-users’ engagement is perceived, how it occurs and how these perceptions differ between three European countries: England, Poland and Slovenia, using the concepts of voice, choice and coproduction.

This comparative, qualitative study is based on a review of legal documents, academic literature and semi-structured interviews conducted in October and November 2011. A research sample consisted of 21 interviewees representing various stakeholders including healthcare-users, doctors and managers. Primary and secondary data were analysed using theoretical thematic analysis. Emerging themes were identified from the interviews and related to the indicators describing healthcare-users’ involvement in the voice, choice and coproduction model.

Results of the comparative qualitative research suggest that the healthcare-users’ influence is strongly grounded in England where the healthcare system and professionals are prepared to include healthcare-users in the decision-making process. In Slovenia, cultural development of healthcare-users’ involvement seems to proceed the institutional development. In Poland, institutions are ready to involve healthcare-users in decision-making process although the cultural desirability of involving users among doctors and patients is lacking.

The notion of user involvement is increasingly gaining importance and research attention, yet there is still little known about the way cultural, political, historical differences between various European countries influence it. This paper explores this little known area using the original approach of user involvement (Dent et al., 2011) with input from various stakeholders including patients, healthcare representatives and academics.

The purpose of this paper is to compare user involvement in the case of assisted reproductive technologies in England and Portugal through the concepts of voice, choice and co-production, assessing the implications for user empowerment.

This qualitative study draws primarily on policy review and uses exploratory semi-structured interviews with key informants as a way of illustrating points. Data on the following themes was compared: voice (users’ representativeness on licensing bodies and channels of communication between users and doctors); choice (funding and accessibility criteria; choice of fertility centres, doctors and level of care); and co-production (criteria through which users actively engage with health professionals in planning the treatment).

Inter- and intra-healthcare systems variations between the two countries on choice and co-production were identified. Differences between funding and accessibility, regions, public and private sectors and attitudes towards doctor-patient relationship (paternalistic/partnership) were the key issues. Although consumer choice and indicators of co-production are evident in treatment pathways in both countries, user empowerment is not. This is limited by inequalities in accessibility criteria, dependence on doctors’ individual perspectives and lack of genuine and formal hearing of citizens’ voice.

Enhancing users’ involvement claims for individual and organizational cultures reflecting user-centred values. Effective ways to incorporate users’ knowledge in shared decision making and co-design are needed to empower patients and to improve the delivery of care.