Robert Baker: Do we really want patients to choose their healthcare?

There is a law of diminishing returns; piling in money will mean more of the same, only more costly

Share

The really odd thing about the NHS is how, despite the pillorying it has had over recent months, it remains so popular. Rather like the royal family, it doesn't seem to matter how many scandals emerge – ultimately people just can't imagine ourselves without it. Defying Wanless to suggest funding our last experiment in socialism other than by direct taxation makes you about as popular as Tom Paulin in a synagogue. The public, in recent opinion polls, have welcomed the money. But they have also, perversely, said that they do not expect anything to change.

The really odd thing about the NHS is how, despite the pillorying it has had over recent months, it remains so popular. Rather like the royal family, it doesn't seem to matter how many scandals emerge – ultimately people just can't imagine ourselves without it. Defying Wanless to suggest funding our last experiment in socialism other than by direct taxation makes you about as popular as Tom Paulin in a synagogue. The public, in recent opinion polls, have welcomed the money. But they have also, perversely, said that they do not expect anything to change.

Viewed from the shop floor as doctors, do we agree? Is this £40bn really about to give the British the best insurance scheme in the world? Doctors love to profess cynicism about such matters. "Not another meddling bureaucratic reform; you can't expect change to occur after so many years of underfunding; the money's a good thing, but can't they leave us alone to get on with our work?" are the three most frequent responses among my colleagues.

The engine for change seems to be greater patient choice – an end to the top-down, government-led bureaucracy of old. Seventy-five per cent of the budget is to be placed in the hands of primary care providers. But it isn't the same as the Tory internal market – definitely not, that was an abject failure.

It is superficially hard to argue with the idea of increased patient choice, and demand being driven from the bottom up. It is edifying to observe how first-rate services arise due to politicised and articulate patient demand – HIV care, for example. Except that putting choice in the hands of patients may not always be the right thing to do.

There are some circumstances, of course, where it is ideal. Doctors, on average, wash their hands after only 14 per cent of examinations. The correct figure should be 100 per cent. The one intervention that has been shown to increase that figure is getting patients to boss them into doing it. So far so good, but how about patient choice for MMR vaccination? Are parents really the right people to make a scientific public health decision?

Besides, what choices are we really giving people by allowing them to pick their own hospital? It isn't even Pepsi versus Coke, more Ovaltine versus Horlicks. Supposing we were to give patients choices about what the NHS should be for. This issue has been examined in something called the Oregon health priorities experiment. Voters in Oregon were asked to prioritise state-funded health care. The results were surprising. The top five priorities were " preventive" care, long-term nursing for the elderly, and critical care for children.

Only 15 per cent voted in favour of state funding for expensive interventions such as organ transplants. In 1987, Oregon's state legislature decided to stop paying for such transplants, except for the kidney and cornea, for Medicaid clients. Would we obtain similar responses in this country? If so, whole flagship NHS transplant departments would have to close down or seek private funding.

Besides, what is the NHS really good at? Until now, its great strength has been in providing adequate health care cheaply. People who work in it – and even external observers – often say the Americans spend about twice as much of their GDP on health care as we do, yet theirs is certainly not twice as good. At least we just about manage to provide cover for everyone, no matter how poor, even if rather sluggishly. There is inevitably a law of diminishing returns in health care, and piling in a load of money will probably mean more of the same, only more expensive.

Gordon Brown argues that the money doesn't matter, because a well-funded NHS will mean a healthier and more productive workforce, and the drain on the Exchequer will cancel out. There is almost no evidence to support this view. Healthcare systems may be justified on the basis of humanitarian help for the sick and disadvantaged, but not on economic grounds. Overall, your health is determined by genetics, relative wealth and social circumstances. Not by your GP or local hospital.

So what is the NHS bad at, and what should the money be put towards? The great issue confronting all Western health systems is one of quality. Recent, if contested, figures suggest that 70,000 people die each year in the NHS from medical errors that are probably avoidable. Two hundred thousand, or one in 10, are harmed in some way during an admission to hospital. In other words, the NHS is one of the nation's leading causes of premature death. This is partly due to staffing levels – particularly patient: nurse ratios. It is partly due to defective infection control – 25 per cent of patients who die in hospital do so with infections they acquired there. Furthermore, with a few honourable exceptions, there are hardly any universally accepted, standardised national protocols for care of most illnesses.

You could, usefully, deal with these problems, but my view is that Gordon Brown has shied at the wrong coconut. The obvious question is: "How can we ensure optimal health for the greatest possible number?" is something that may not have much to do with the NHS. Instead, what has been addressed is: "How can we deal with the NHS in the most popular way possible?" In other words: "How can we win the next election?"

The author is a doctor in a London teaching hospital

React Now

Latest stories from i100
Have you tried new the Independent Digital Edition apps?
SPONSORED FEATURES
iJobs Job Widget
iJobs General

Recruitment Genius: Personal Tax Senior

£28000 - £37000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: This is an opportunity to join ...

Recruitment Genius: Customer and Markets Development Executive

£22000 - £29000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: This company's mission is to ma...

Recruitment Genius: Guest Services Assistant

£13832 per annum: Recruitment Genius: This 5 star leisure destination on the w...

Recruitment Genius: Sales Account Manager

£20000 - £32000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: A Sales Account Manager is requ...

Day In a Page

Read Next
Chrissie Hynde of the Pretenders joins the Latitude 2014 line-up  

Being sexually assaulted was not your fault, Chrissie Hynde - please don't tell other victims it was theirs

Holly Baxter
A nap a day could save your life - and here's why

A nap a day could save your life

A midday nap is 'associated with reduced blood pressure'
If men are so obsessed by sex, why do they clam up when confronted with the grisly realities?

If men are so obsessed by sex...

...why do they clam up when confronted with the grisly realities?
The comedy titans of Avalon on their attempt to save BBC3

Jon Thoday and Richard Allen-Turner

The comedy titans of Avalon on their attempt to save BBC3
The bathing machine is back... but with a difference

Rolling in the deep

The bathing machine is back but with a difference
Part-privatised tests, new age limits, driverless cars: Tories plot motoring revolution

Conservatives plot a motoring revolution

Draft report reveals biggest reform to regulations since driving test introduced in 1935
The Silk Roads that trace civilisation: Long before the West rose to power, Asian pathways were connecting peoples and places

The Silk Roads that trace civilisation

Long before the West rose to power, Asian pathways were connecting peoples and places
House of Lords: Outcry as donors, fixers and MPs caught up in expenses scandal are ennobled

The honours that shame Britain

Outcry as donors, fixers and MPs caught up in expenses scandal are ennobled
When it comes to street harassment, we need to talk about race

'When it comes to street harassment, we need to talk about race'

Why are black men living the stereotypes and why are we letting them get away with it?
International Tap Festival: Forget Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers - this dancing is improvised, spontaneous and rhythmic

International Tap Festival comes to the UK

Forget Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers - this dancing is improvised, spontaneous and rhythmic
War with Isis: Is Turkey's buffer zone in Syria a matter of self-defence – or just anti-Kurd?

Turkey's buffer zone in Syria: self-defence – or just anti-Kurd?

Ankara accused of exacerbating racial division by allowing Turkmen minority to cross the border
Doris Lessing: Acclaimed novelist was kept under MI5 observation for 18 years, newly released papers show

'A subversive brothel keeper and Communist'

Acclaimed novelist Doris Lessing was kept under MI5 observation for 18 years, newly released papers show
Big Blue Live: BBC's Springwatch offshoot swaps back gardens for California's Monterey Bay

BBC heads to the Californian coast

The Big Blue Live crew is preparing for the first of three episodes on Sunday night, filming from boats, planes and an aquarium studio
Austin Bidwell: The Victorian fraudster who shook the Bank of England with the most daring forgery the world had known

Victorian fraudster who shook the Bank of England

Conman Austin Bidwell. was a heartless cad who carried out the most daring forgery the world had known
Car hacking scandal: Security designed to stop thieves hot-wiring almost every modern motor has been cracked

Car hacking scandal

Security designed to stop thieves hot-wiring almost every modern motor has been cracked
10 best placemats

Take your seat: 10 best placemats

Protect your table and dine in style with a bold new accessory