RSM logo
Journal of Health Services Research & Policy

Home Current issue Browse archive Alerts About the journal Feedback
 
J Health Serv Res Policy 2001;6:158-162
doi:10.1258/1355819011927413
© 2001 Royal Society of Medicine Press

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Marshall, M.
Right arrow Articles by Davies, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Essay

Public release of information on quality of care: how are health services and the public expected to respond?

Martin Marshall, Huw Davies


National Primary Care Research and Development Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; Department of Management, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK

Public disclosure of the comparative performance of health care providers has been proposed as one mechanism of improving the quality of care. Performance data have been made public in the USA for over a decade and the provision of comparative information about quality of care is a central feature of current UK government health policy. The balance between the advantages and risks of pursuing such a policy in a publicly funded health service is largely unknown. Advocates of public disclosure cite the role that comparative data can play in ensuring accountability, shifting the ownership of information (and therefore power) from professionals to service users and encouraging improvements in the processes and outcomes of care. However, these expectations are not necessarily realistic. There is some evidence that the public make little use of comparative data and there is a risk that public release may result in a loss of confidence in the health system and demoralisation of health service staff. In addition, there is a legitimate doubt that any early impact of disclosure will not be sustained and that the outcomes will not justify the necessary expenditure. In conclusion, we suggest that the theoretical benefits of promoting public disclosure as voiced by advocates of the policy may not be realised in practice.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Qual Saf Health CareHome page
A E Powell, H T O Davies, and R G Thomson
Using routine comparative data to assess the quality of health care: understanding and avoiding common pitfalls
Qual. Saf. Health Care, April 1, 2003; 12(2): 122 - 128.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Qual Saf Health CareHome page
C A Vincent and A Coulter
Patient safety: what about the patient?
Qual. Saf. Health Care, March 1, 2002; 11(1): 76 - 80.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]