Getting more for their dollar: a comparison of the NHS with California's Kaiser Permanente

ObjectiveTo compare the costs and performance of the NHS with those of an integrated system for financing and delivery health services (Kaiser Permanente) in California.MethodsThe adjusted costs of the two systems and their performance were compared with respect to inputs, use, access to services, responsiveness, and limited quality indicators.ResultsThe per capita costs of the two systems, adjusted for differences in benefits, special activities, population characteristics, and the cost environment, were similar to within 10%. Some aspects of performance differed. In particular, Kaiser members experience more comprehensive and convenient primary care services and much more rapid access to specialist services and hospital admissions. Age adjusted rates of use of acute hospital services in Kaiser were one third of those in the NHS.ConclusionsThe widely held beliefs that the NHS is efficient and that poor performance in certain areas is largely explained by underinvestment are not supported by this analysis. Kaiser achieved better performance at roughly the same cost as the NHS because of integration throughout the system, efficient management of hospital use, the benefits of competition, and greater investment in information technology.

What is already known on this topic

Comparisons of healthcare systems in different countries have to be undertaken with great care but can be instructiveThe overall healthcare system in the United States is more expensive than the NHS and population health outcomes are no betterThe US healthcare system comprises many discrete and unique subsystems, including the health maintenance organisations

What this paper adds

An integrated, non-profit health maintenance organisation in California (Kaiser Permanente), with over six million members, costs about the same as the NHS but performs considerably betterKaiser''s superior performance is mainly in prompt and appropriate diagnosis and treatmentThese findings challenge the widely held view that the NHS is efficient and that its inadequacies are mainly due to underinvestment     

Equity in the NHS. Monitoring and promoting equity in primary and secondary care.

Although need is often assumed to be the most important factor in determining the use of health services, there are many inequities in the provision and use of NHS services in both primary and secondary care. For example, existing data from district child health information services have been combined with census data for small areas to show wide variations in immunisation rates between affluent and deprived areas. Purchasers of health care are already responsible for assessing health needs and evaluating services, and the process of monitoring equity is a logical extension of these activities. Routine data sources used to collect activity data in both primary and secondary care can be used to assess needs for care and monitor how well these needs are met. Purchasers and providers should collaborate to improve the usefulness of these routine data and to develop a framework for monitoring and promoting equity more systematically.     

Who pays for community care? The same old question.

Trends in mental health service funding over the past 40 years show that the programme of hospital closures has not resulted in a significant release of resources to fund community based services. Far from being excessive, the current provision of residential services (both NHS and non-NHS) for mentally ill people is now below levels recommended as sufficient by the government, the Royal College of Psychiatrists, and the National Schizophrenia Fellowship. What clinical research evidence there is suggests that more rather than fewer residential places are required. This situation is likely to be compounded by the recent transfer of responsibility for funding private and voluntary residential care from the Department of Social Security to local authority social services departments.     

Twenty-first-century medical microbiology services in the UK

With infection once again a high priority for the UK National Health Service (NHS), the medical microbiology and infection-control services require increased technology resources and more multidisciplinary staff. Clinical care and health protection need a coordinated network of microbiology services working to consistent standards, provided locally by NHS Trusts and supported by the regional expertise and national reference laboratories of the new Health Protection Agency. Here, I outline my thoughts on the need for these new resources and the ways in which clinical microbiology services in the UK can best meet the demands of the twenty-first century.     

HPV trials update

There are many developments in cytology and in the NHS that will impact on the NHS Cervical Screening Programme over the next few years. In the short term HPV is a major issue, whether triage, primary screening or vaccination with further evidence coming forward from NHS early implementers and from research trials. Cytology automation is also already being trialled for the UK.
So far as NHS developments go, we already have the two Carter reports, one on pathology modernisation and one on commissioning are both likely to impact on our service, as is the forthcoming Cancer Reform Strategy which should be out in a few months time. This will set out a blue print for cancer services in 2012, by which time the cervical screening programme could have a very different shape.     

Implications for health services.

Health services for older people in the NHS have developed pragmatically, and reflect the nature of disease in later life and the need to agree objectives of care with patients. Although services are likely to be able to cope with the immediate future, the growth of the elderly population anticipated from 2030 calls for long-term planning and research. The issue of funding requires immediate political thought and action. Scientifically the focus needs to be on maximizing the efficiency of services by health services research and reducing the incidence of disability in later life through research on its biological and social determinants. Senescence is a progressive loss of adaptability due to an interaction between intrinsic (genetic) processes with extrinsic factors in environment and lifestyle. There are grounds for postulating that a policy of postponement of the onset of disability, by modifications of lifestyle and environment, could reduce the average duration of disability before death. The new political structures of Europe offer under exploited-unexploited opportunities for the necessary research.     

Maintaining excellence: the preservation and development of specialised services.

The advent of the Tomlinson inquiry draws attention to the need to strike a balance between market led and planned approaches to health care delivery. This is important not just for hospital rationalisation but also for the preservation and development of services which are provided in a smaller number of hospitals. Specialised services are often in the forefront of raising standards of care and introducing new developments and innovations. They are the only option for a small number of patients with serious illnesses. In the internal market for health care provision created by the 1990 NHS reforms more sophisticated and flexible mechanisms must be found to provide stability for specialised services while at the same time enabling the benefits of purchaser choice and provider competition to be realised.     

London after Tomlinson. Clinical research.

Sir Bernard Tomlinson''s report focuses on London''s health services, but his proposals have major implications for the future of clinical research--not just in London but in the United Kingdom as a whole. They must be seen in the context of a widely perceived decline in British research and development which also threatens clinical research. This article examines the implications of Tomlinson''s proposals and related strategies and recommends the construction of a research market for the patient costs of clinical research to complement the NHS market for patient services introduced in 1991. These arrangements would help sustain the clinical research base and guarantee excellence.     

Reforming the Department of Health's research and development policy: from the devil to the deep blue sea?

Research into health and social services in Britain is largely funded by the Department of Health. Regional NHS research and development has recently been reformed and a new report now proposes replacement of the 13 research units funded by the department with three or four large multidisciplinary centres. Evidence to support such a step is lacking, and many criticisms of the existing units arise from poor departmental planning rather than deficiencies of the units themselves. Large units may make research less responsive to the department''s needs, and it is essential that the proposed new structure is thoroughly evaluated before it is introduced.     

The rationing agenda in the NHS. Rationing Agenda Group.

The Rationing Agenda Group has been founded to deepen the British debate on rationing health care. It believes that rationing in health care is inevitable and that the public must be involved in the debate about issues relating to rationing. The group comprises people from all parts of health care, none of whom represent either their group or their institutions. RAG has begun by producing this document, which attempts to set an agenda of all the issues that need to be considered when debating the rationing of health care. We hope for responses to the document. The next stage will be to incorporate the responses into the agenda. Then RAG will divide the agenda into manageable chunks and commission expert, detailed commentaries. From this material a final paper will be published and used to prompt public debate. This stage should be reached early in 1997. While these papers are being prepared RAG is developing ways to involve the public in the debate and evaluate the whole process. We present as neutrally as possible all the issues related to rationing and priority setting in the NHS. We focus on the NHS for two reasons. Firstly, for those of us resident in the United Kingdom the NHS is the health care system with which we are most familiar and most concerned. Secondly, focusing on one system alone allows more coherent analysis than would be possible if issues in other systems were included as well. Our concern is with the delivery of health care, not its finance, though we discuss the possible effects of changing the financing system of the NHS. Finally, though our position is neutral, we hold two substantive views--namely, that rationing is unavoidable and that there should be more explicit debate about the principles and issues concerned. We consider the issues under four headings: preliminaries, ethics, democracy, and empirical questions. Preliminaries deal with the semantics of rationing, whether rationing is necessary, and with the range of services to which rationing relates. Under ethics and democracy are the substantive issues of principle and theory. The final section deals with empirical questions and those relating to the practicality of various strategies.     

Setting priorities for research and development in the NHS: a case study on the interface between primary and secondary care.

Since 1991 the NHS has attempted to identify and prioritise its needs for research and development in a systematic manner. This has not been done before and there is little evidence on which to draw. Multidisciplinary expert groups have identified priorities in different topics using explicit criteria and after widespread consultation within the NHS and research community to identify pressing problems and opportunities for research. This paper focuses on a review completed in 1993 to identify research and development priorities for the NHS in relation to the interface between primary and secondary care. The review covered several recent developments which require evaluation. The authors describe the process used to identify research and development priorities in this complex subject and examine the strengths and weaknesses of the approach. This case study should help to stimulate a wider debate on methods of identifying priorities, particularly those using participatory approaches, in research and non-research contexts.     

Self-help materials for the prevention of smoking relapse: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Most people who stop smoking successfully for a few weeks will return to smoking again in the medium term. There are few effective interventions to prevent this relapse and none used routinely in clinical practice. A previous exploratory meta-analysis suggested that self-help booklets may be effective but requires confirmation. This trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a set of self-help educational materials to prevent smoking relapse in the NHS Stop Smoking Service. METHODS: This is an open, randomised controlled trial. The target population is carbon monoxide (CO) verified quitters at 4 weeks in the NHS stop smoking clinic (total sample size N=1,400). The experimental intervention tested is a set of 8 revised Forever Free booklets, including an introduction booklet and more extensive information on all important issues for relapse prevention. The control intervention is a leaflet that has no evidence to suggest it is effective but is currently given to some patients using NHS stop smoking services. Two follow-up telephone interviews will be conducted at 3 and 12 months after quit date. The primary outcome will be prolonged abstinence from months 4-12 with no more than 5 lapses, confirmed by carbon monoxide test at 12 month assessment. The secondary outcomes will be 7-day self-report point prevalence abstinence at 3 months and 7-day biochemically confirmed point prevalence abstinence at 12 months. To assess cost-effectiveness, costs will be estimated from a health service perspective and the EQ-5D will be used to estimate the QALY (Quality Adjusted Life Year) gain associated with each intervention. The comparison of smoking abstinence rates (and any other binary outcomes) between the two trial arms will be carried out using odds ratio as the outcome statistic and other related statistical tests. Exploratory subgroup analyses, including logistic regression analyses with interaction terms, will be conducted to investigate possible effect modifying variables. DISCUSSION: The possible effect of self-help educational materials for the prevention of smoking relapse has important public health implications. Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN36980856.     

Community health services.

The Tomlinson report, with its emphasis on primary and community care, offers great scope to community health services, for long the poor relation of the NHS, and particularly poorly resourced in London. The aim is to create services that break down the barriers between primary, secondary, and tertiary health care and concentrate on providing high quality care tailored to individual patients'' needs. Thus a range of flexible options needs to be developed between acute hospital based care and the standard home care arrangements currently provided by district nurses. Examples, include hospital at home schemes, nursing beds, and rehabilitation beds. Together community and primary care services need to consider weekend coverage, to conduct research, and to become a setting for education. The infrastructure for primary and community care must, however, be put in place before acute facilities are shut.     

Control and prevention of tuberculosis in Britain: an updated code of practice. Subcommittee of the Joint Tuberculosis Committee of the British Thoracic Society.

A subcommitte was appointed by the Joint Tuberculosis Committee of the British Thoracic Society to review and bring up to date guidelines on control measures for tuberculosis. The updated code of practice emphasises that all cases of tuberculosis must be notified. A minority of patients need admission, and those with positive sputum smears should be regarded as infectious until they have received two weeks of chemotherapy. NHS staff at risk should be protected, and evidence of infectious tuberculosis should be sought as routine among certain prospective NHS employees, schoolteachers, and others. Contact tracing should be vigorously pursued, and all entrants to Britain from countries where tuberculosis is common should be screened. BCG vaccination should be offered in selected instances, and local organisation of tuberculosis services should be extended.     

Terminal care: present services and future priorities.

Since 1975 hospices and other specialist services for terminal cancer have expanded rapidly. In December 1980 this survey found 72 such services in Britain providing 58 inpatient units, 32 home care teams, and eight hospital support teams. Many were outside the NHS. Inpatient units provided 1297 beds (modal size 21-25 beds) and dealt with under 7% of deaths from cancer. Home care teams provided 76.5 full-time equivalent nurses (modal size two nurses). Regional variations were considerable: from 10.9 beds/million population in Trent to 48.5 beds/million in South-west Thames; no home care nurses in Mersey and Wales, and 5.1 nurses/million in Wessex. Of 58 more services being planned, the 17 starting in 1981 will not substantially alter these regional imbalances. Respondents'' opinions suggest a target of 40-50 inpatient unit beds/million population. This might be reduced if hospitals were better equipped to deal with these patients. Suggested priorities are to redress regional inequalities, develop home care and hospital support teams rather than inpatient units, and improve teaching and training. Co-ordination of plans between the NHS and the voluntary sector is needed.     

Intravenous antimicrobial therapy in the community: underused,inadequately resourced,or irrelevant to health care in Britain?

The NHS Executive is keen to promote "hospital at home" services in Britain, as part of its philosophy of keeping more care in the community and also to relieve the increasing demand for hospital beds. One such service is the provision of intravenous antimicrobial therapy in the community. Yet, compared with the United States, where home or outpatient intravenous antimicrobial therapy programmes are well developed, experience in Britain and Europe is limited, reflecting a difference in cultural attitudes and healthcare structures between the two continents. Only a few units in Britain currently run home intravenous antimicrobial therapy programmes, and several issues need to be addressed if more treatment is to be provided outside hospital. These include an assessment of the need for community intravenous antibiotic treatment and which patient groups many benefit. The main motive for community intravenous treatment should be better patient care and not simply a reduction in healthcare costs. At present the pace of change is being set by a few clinical enthusiasts and by commercial organisations, whereas the NHS deserves a more organised strategy for purchasing treatment with intravenous antibiotics in the community.     

Economic evaluation and health care. What does it mean?

Ever since the concept of value for money in health care was introduced into the NHS, economic terms and jargon have become part of our everyday lives--but do we understand what the different types of economic evaluation all mean, particularly those that sound similar to the uninitiated? This article introduces readers to the purpose of economic evaluation, and briefly explains the differences between cost-minimisation analysis (used when the outcomes of the procedures being compared are the same); cost-effectiveness analysis (used when the outcomes may vary, but can be expressed in common natural units, such as mm Hg for treatments of hypertension); cost-utility analysis (used when outcomes do vary--for example, quality of life scales); and cost-benefit analysis (used when a monetary value is being placed on services received). Further articles will deal with each one in more detail.     

Options for change in the NHS consultant contract.

The lead negotiators for the management and consultant sides in an NHS trust in northern England responded to debate in their trust about consultant contracts by offering to research the attitudes of their peers towards a variety of contract options. The options tested included the current contract; models already examined in the trust and elsewhere, such as time sensitive and mild performance related contracts; and some more radical and speculative possibilities, including consultants franchising their services to the trust. Beyond the predictable conclusion that consultants would prefer no change while managers desired it, a time sensitive contract emerged as having potential for successful negotiation. On the other hand, neither consultants nor managers favoured a strict performance related contract or a fee for service contract. There was a strong similarity of opinion between the two groups on the relative salary values of the options, though the consultants consistently priced these higher than the managers.     

Equity in community care.

The implementation of the NHS and Community Care Act 1990 made local authority social services departments responsible for the organisation and funding of support and care in the community. This development took effect at the same time as a blurring of the boundaries between health and social care. One consequence is that the relevance of equity (a guiding principle of the 1946 National Health Service Act, but relatively lacking from the 1948 National Assistance Act, the foundation of many social services) has come to be more keenly appreciated within personal social services. Equity questions arise in community care over the distribution of public resources between different client groups, income groups, generations, and localities. Moreover, no mechanisms exist to monitor the trends that emerge from different ways that people get access to care. Yet there is a risk that substantial divisive consequences may occur, particularly between generations.