Patient Choice Has Become the Standard Practice in Healthcare Provision: It is Time to Extend its Meaning; Comment on “Is Patient Choice the Future of Health Care Systems?”

Document Type : Commentary

Author

Justus Liebig University Giessen, Giessen, Germany

Abstract

The key argument of this commentary is that patient choice has a broader meaning than suggested by consumerist choice models. In increasingly marketized health care systems with diversified and knowledge-based service arrangements, patients are continuously obliged to choose insurers, physicians or hospitals and treatments—whether they like it or not. However, health care users refer to a wide range of roles and resources while taking health-related decisions. They are patients, consumers and co-producers at the same time. Therefore, as it is argued, healthcare policies have to recognize users’ multiple identities by providing more balanced choice frameworks. In particular, two aspects are crucial: first, opportunities for users to voice worries and concerns and to co-design default options of health care choices; secondly, taking the significance of interpersonal trust in choice-making processes into account.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1. Fotaki M. Is patient choice the future of health care systems? International Journal of Health Policy and Management 2013; 1: 121–3. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2013.22
2. Simmons R, Powell M, Greener I. The consumer in public services. Choice, values and differences. Bristol: Policy Press; 2009. doi: 10.1017/s0047279409990341
3. Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 2008. doi: 10.1007/s10602-008-9056-2
4. Krugman P. Patients are not consumers. New York Times [serial on the Internet]. [updated 2011 Apr 21; cited 2013 Aug 25]; Available from: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/22/opinion/22krugman.html
5. Hirschman AO. Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1970. p. 120. doi: 10.1093/sf/49.3.502-a
6. Dowding K, John P. Voice and Choice in Health Care in England: Understanding Citizen Responses to Dissatisfaction. Public Adm 2011; 89: 1403–18. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01960.x
7. Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. Libertarian Paternalism. Am Econ Rev 2003; 93: 175–9. doi: 10.1257/000282803321947001
8. Ewert B, Evers A. Co-Production: Contested meanings and challenges for user organizations. In Brandsen T, Pestoff V, Verschuere B, eds. New Public Governance, the Third Sector and Co-Production. New York: Routledge; 2011. p. 61–78. doi: 10.1007/s11266-013-9410-5
9. Kuhlmann E. Modernizing Health Care. Bristol: Policy Press; 2006. p. 15.
10. Le Grand J. Motivation, Agency and Public Policy. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006. p. 75.
11. Clarke J, Newman J, Smith N, Vidler E, Westmarland L. Creating Citizen-Consumers. Changing Publics and Changing Public Services. London; SAGE Publications Ltd; 2007. doi: 10.1177/02610183070070040903

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 27 August 2013
  • Revise Date: 14 September 2013
  • Accept Date: 10 September 2013
  • First Publish Date: 14 September 2013

Share

How to cite

Statistics