Association of travel time, patient characteristics, and hospital quality with patient mobility for breast cancer surgery: A national population-based study.

BACKGROUND: This national study investigated hospital quality and patient factors associated with treatment location for breast cancer surgery. METHODS: By using linked administrative data sets from the English National Health Service, the authors identified all women diagnosed between January 2, 2016, and December 31, 2018, who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) or a mastectomy with or without immediate breast reconstruction. The extent to which patients bypassed their nearest hospital was investigated using a geographic information system (ArcGIS). Conditional logistic regressions were used to estimate the impact of travel time, hospital quality, and patient characteristics. RESULTS: 22,622 Of 69,153 patients undergoing BCS, 22,622 (32.7%) bypassed their nearest hospital; and, of 23,536 patients undergoing mastectomy, 7179 (30.5%) bypassed their nearest hospital. Women who were younger, without comorbidities, or from rural areas were more likely to travel to more distant hospitals (p < .05). Patients undergoing BCS (odds ratio [OR], 1.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36-2.50) or mastectomy (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.14-2.02) were more likely to be treated at specialist breast reconstruction centers despite not undergoing the procedure. Patients receiving mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction were more likely to travel to hospitals employing surgeons who had a media reputation (OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.28-4.52). Patients undergoing BCS were less likely to travel to hospitals with shorter surgical waiting times (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.46-0.92). The authors did not observe a significant impact for research activity, hospital quality rating, breast re-excision rates, or the status as a multidisciplinary cancer center. CONCLUSIONS: Patient choice policies may drive inequalities in the health care system without improving patient outcomes.

Factors Informing High-Risk Primary Care Patient Choice around Telehealth Use: a Framework.

BACKGROUND: While telehealth's presence in post-pandemic primary care appears assured, its exact role remains unknown. Value-based care's expansion has heightened interest in telehealth's potential to improve uptake of preventive and chronic disease care, especially among high-risk primary care populations. Despite this, the pandemic underscored patients' diverse preferences around using telehealth. Understanding the factors underlying this population's preferences can inform future telehealth strategies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the factors informing high-risk primary care patient choice of whether to pursue primary care via telehealth, in-office or to defer care altogether. DESIGN: Qualitative, cross-sectional study utilizing semi-structured telephone interviews of a convenience sample of 29 primary care patients between July 13 and September 30, 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care patients at high risk of poor health outcomes and/or acute care utilization who were offered a follow-up primary care visit via audiovisual, audio-only or in-office modalities. APPROACH: Responses were analyzed via grounded theory, using a constant comparison method to refine emerging categories, distinguish codes, and synthesize evolving themes. KEY RESULTS: Of the 29 participants, 16 (55.2%) were female and 19 (65.5%) were Black; the mean age (SD) was 64.6 (11.1). Participants identified four themes influencing their choice of visit type: perceived utility (encapsulating clinical and non-clinical utility), underlying costs (in terms of time, money, effort, and safety), modifiers (e.g., participants' clinical situation, choice availability, decision phenotype), and drivers (inclusive of their background experiences and digital environment). The relationship of these themes is depicted in a novel framework of patient choice around telehealth use. CONCLUSIONS: While visit utility and cost considerations are foundational to participants' decisions around whether to pursue care via telehealth, underappreciated modifiers and drivers often magnify or mitigate these considerations. Policymakers, payers, and health systems can leverage these factors to anticipate and enhance equitable high-value telehealth use in primary care settings among high-risk individuals.

Impacts of Norway's extended free choice reform on waiting times and hospital visits.

Norway's extended free choice (EFC) reform extends the patient's choice of publicly funded hospitals for treatment to authorized private institutions (EFC providers). We study the effects of the reform on waiting times, number of visits, and patients' Charlson Comorbidity Index scores in public hospitals. We use a difference-in-differences model to compare changes over time for public hospitals with and without EFC providers in the catchment area. Focusing on five prevalent somatic services, we find that the EFC reform did not exert pressure on public hospitals to stimulate shorter waiting times and more visits. Moreover, we do not find that the sum of public and private visits increased. When we compare patient comorbidity between public hospitals and EFC providers, we find that for non-invasive diagnostic services, patient comorbidity is lower in EFC providers. For surgical services, we detect no difference in patient comorbidities between public and EFC providers.

Transition to Subcutaneous Infliximab vs Vedolizumab in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Prospective Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Transition from intravenous (IV) to subcutaneous (SC) administration is an option in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) with Infliximab (IFX) or Vedolizumab (VDZ). The aim was to compare the adherence, the persistence in therapy, and quality of life (QoL) at baseline, at 6, at 12 months of SC IFX versus SC VDZ. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational, multicenter study on patients with IBD in treatment with IV IFX or VDZ who switched to SC. All patients investigated the QoL by the short IBD Questionnaire (sIBDQ) and the concerns and expectations by a 6-item survey. Any adverse events, local and systemic, were reported. Safety, concerns, and satisfaction were evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred and eight out of 93 patients were replaced, 51 to SC IFX and 42 to SC VDZ. The majority accepted the SC route. Persistence in therapy was similar between the two groups. The QoL improved after 6 months (p = 0.004), but at T12 both groups show a significant decline in QoL. SC administration has not caused any concern for patients. As safety, both groups reported a similar number of local reactions (IFX 19.60% vs VDZ 19.04%). In the IFX group were reported more systemic reactions (IFX 11.6% vs VDZ 7.14%) without the need for hospitalization. CONCLUSION: The transition from IV to SC administration is an appropriate and safe option for treatment with IFX or VDZ. It is very important to consider the patient's choice and preference. The SC administration led to a significant benefit in QoL, especially in the first 6 months of therapy.

Shared decision-making in scaling and root planing.

INTRODUCTION: Estimate proportion of various approaches used by dental hygienists for engaging patients in decisions commonly arising during scaling and root planing. Distribution of approaches was compared across various task components in this procedure, practice experience of dental hygienists and patient compliance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Survey of graduates from and students in a baccalaureate dental hygiene program. RESULTS: Paternalism (tell then do) and informed consent (give choices and reasons and ask for permission) were more common than shared decision-making (discuss alternatives, solicit patient input and arrive at a mutual decision) and disengagement (patient refusing offered service or avoiding further involvement) by a ratio of 4 to 1 for the first 2 compared with the latter 2. This relationship was held across selecting treatment, procedural adjuncts, homecare instructions and financial arrangements. Dental hygienists exhibited a range of personal preferences for engagement approaches. No-show rate, patient disengagement outside the office, was high (20%). CONCLUSION: Dental hygienists reported using 'more controlled' approaches to engaging patients in decisions regarding treatment. Patients may prefer to engage in more shared decisions and choose this approach by staying away from the office. This may underestimate patients' decisions to stay away from treatment, for example by not showing for completion of the treatment or disregarding homecare routines.

Impact of patient choice and hospital competition on patient outcomes after rectal cancer surgery: A national population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the current national cohort study was to analyze the correlation between choice and competition on outcomes after cancer surgery in rectal cancer. METHODS: The analysis included all men who underwent rectal cancer surgery in the English National Health Service between March 2015 and April 2019 (n = 13,996). Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess the effect of a rectal cancer surgery center being located in a competitive environment (based on the number of centers within a threshold distance) and being a successful competitor (based on the ability to attract patients from other hospitals) on eight patient-level outcomes: 30- and 90-day emergency readmissions, 30-day re-operation rates, 90-day postoperative mortality, length of stay >14 days, circumferential resection margin status, rates of primary procedure with a permanent stoma, and rates of persistent stoma 18 months after anterior resection. RESULTS: With adjustment for patient characteristics, patients who underwent surgery in centers located in a stronger competitive environment were less likely to have an abdominoperineal excision or a Hartman's procedure (odds ratio [OR], 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-0.97, p = .04). Additionally, individuals who received treatment at hospitals that were successful competitors had a lower risk of a 90-day readmission following rectal cancer surgery (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.97, p = .03) and were less likely to have a persistent stoma at 18 months after anterior resection (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61-0.93, p = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals located in areas of high competition are associated with better patient outcomes and improved processes of care for rectal cancer surgery.

'We want it all': ART preferences assessed by Desirability of Outcome Ranking.

OBJECTIVES: Understanding how people living with HIV (PLWH) view antiretroviral therapy (ART) prescribing choices is fundamental to patient-centred care. We used the Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR) approach to explore patient ART preferences. METHODS: Seventy-four PLWH entered the study, 20 into the 'pilot study', and 54 in the 'comparative study'. Participants ranked five different hypothetical patient stories by desirability. Each story comprised five narrative lines, each line addressing one treatment characteristic drawn from one of five pre-selected domains (treatment failure, treatment difficulty, adverse effects, long-term complications, life events). Narrative lines could be favourable or adverse. In the pilot study the number of adverse domains varied from one to five. Comparative study stories were fixed at two adverse versus three favourable domains, to test the relative ranking of different domains. RESULTS: The pilot study identified a relationship between the number of adverse domains and rank (R2  = 0.54; p < 0.0001, Friedman test), however pairwise differences in ranking were not significant beyond three adverse domains. In the comparative study, all domains were ranked equally across the cohort (p = 0.88; Friedman test). In pre-defined demographic subgroup analyses, women ranked the 'treatment failure' domain significantly less desirable than men (p = 0.0014, Mann-Whitney test). CONCLUSIONS: People living with HIV appear to care equally about all aspects of ART. The observation that male and female PLWH have different treatment priorities merits further investigation in larger studies. Interindividual differences highlight the importance of individualized shared decision-making and treatment personalization. DOOR may have a role as a pre-treatment assessment tool as well as a research technique.

Cognitive-behavioural versus cognitive-analytic guided self-help for mild-to-moderate anxiety: a pragmatic, randomised patient preference trial.

BACKGROUND: Guided self-help (GSH) for anxiety is widely implemented in primary care services because of service efficiency gains, but there is also evidence of poor acceptability, low effectiveness and relapse. AIMS: The aim was to compare preferences for, acceptability and efficacy of cognitive-behavioural guided self-help (CBT-GSH) versus cognitive-analytic guided self-help (CAT-GSH). METHOD: This was a pragmatic, randomised, patient preference trial (Clinical trials identifier: NCT03730532). The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) was the primary outcome at 8- and 24-week follow-up. Interventions were delivered competently on the telephone via structured workbooks over 6-8 (30-35 min) sessions by trained practitioners. RESULTS: A total of 271 eligible participants were included, of whom 19 (7%) accepted being randomised and 252 (93%) chose their treatment. In the preference cohort, 181 (72%) chose CAT-GSH and 71 (28%) preferred CBT-GSH. BAI outcomes in the preference and randomised cohorts did not differ at 8 weeks (-0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.52 to 2.92) or 24 weeks (0.85, 95% CI -2.87 to 4.57). After controlling for allocation method and baseline covariates, there were no differences between CAT-GSH and CBT-GSH at 8 weeks (F(1, 263) = 0.22, P = 0.639) or at 24 weeks (F(1, 263) = 0.22, P = 0.639). Mean BAI change from baseline was a reduction of 9.28 for CAT-GSH and 9.78 for CBT-GSH at 8 weeks and 12.90 for CAT-GSH and 12.43 for CBT-GSH at 24 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Patients accessing routine primary care talking treatments prefer to choose the intervention they receive. CAT-GSH expands the treatment offer in primary care for patients with anxiety seeking a brief but analytically informed GSH solution.

Impact of centralization of prostate cancer services on the choice of radical treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of centralization of prostate cancer surgery and radiotherapy services on the choice of prostate cancer treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This national population-based study used linked cancer registry data and administrative hospital-level data for all 16 621 patients who were diagnosed between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2018 with intermediate-risk prostate cancer and who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) or radical radiation therapy (RT) in the English National Health Service (NHS). Travel times by car to treating centres were estimated using a geographic information system. We used logistic regression to assess the impact of the relative proximity of alternative treatment options on the type of treatment received, with adjustment for patient characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 78 NHS hospitals that provide RT or RP for prostate cancer, 41% provide both, 36% provide RT and 23% provide RP. Compared to patients who had both treatment options available at their nearest centre where overall 57% of patients received RT and 43% RP, patients were less likely to receive RT if their nearest centre offered RP only and the extra travel time to a hospital providing RT was >15 min (52% of patients received RT and 48% RP%, odds ratio [OR] 0.70 (0.58-0.85); P < 0.001). Conversely, patients were more likely to receive RT if their nearest centre offered RT and the extra travel time to a hospital providing RP was >15 min (63% of patients received RT and 37% RP, OR 1.23 (1.08-1.40); P < 0.001). There was a negligible impact on the type of treatment received if centres providing alternative treatment options were ≤15-min travel time from each other. CONCLUSION: The relative proximity of prostate cancer treatment options to a patient's residence is an independent predictor for the type of radical treatment received. Centralization policies for prostate cancer should not focus on one treatment modality but should consider all treatments to avoid a negative impact on treatment choice.

Trajectories of primary health care utilization: a 10-year follow-up after the Swedish Patient Choice Reform of primary health care.

BACKGROUND: In January 2010, the choice reform was instituted in Swedish primary health care establishing free entry for private primary health care providers and enabling patients to choose freely among primary health care centers. The motivation behind the reform was to improve access to primary care and responsiveness to patient expectations. Reform effects on health care utilization have previously been investigated by using subgroup analyses assuming a pattern of homogeneous subgroups of the population. By using a different methodological approach, the aim of this study was to, from an equity perspective, investigate long term trends of primary health care utilization following the choice reform. METHOD: A closed cohort was created based on register data from Region Skåne, the third most populated region in Sweden, describing individuals' health care utilization between 2007-2017. Using a novel approach, utilization data, measured as primary health care visits, was matched with socioeconomic and geographic determinants, and analyzed using logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 659,298 individuals were included in the cohort. Sex differences in utilization were recorded to decrease in the older age group and to increase in the younger age group. Multivariable logistic regression showed increasing utilization in older men to be associated with higher socioeconomic position, while in women it was associated with lower socioeconomic position. Furthermore, groups of becoming high utilizers were all associated with lower socioeconomic position and with residence in urban areas. CONCLUSION: The impact of demographic, socioeconomic and geographic determinants on primary health care utilization varies in magnitude and direction between groups of the population. As a result, the increase in utilization as observed in the general population following the choice reform is unevenly distributed between different population groups.

Association between patient choice of provider and patient-reported experience.

Health providers are striving to create a more positive, patient-centred experience. However, existing scholarly research about the association between determinants of patient choice of provider and patient-reported experience remains insufficient to effectively promote patient-centredness in healthcare systems. This study used a sample from the nationally representative 2020 Healthcare Experience Survey. Among the respondents (n = 12 133), 6809 who used outpatient services were selected for analysis. The variable of interest was the determinant of the patient choice of provider, and the dependent variables were patient-reported experiences (e.g. general satisfaction, experience with doctors, and experience with health providers and nurses). Data were analyzed using a multivariable logistic regression model by correcting for covariates. General satisfaction was positively associated with providers' expertise factors and public image factors [providers' expertise factors: odds ratio (OR), 2.96; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.44-3.59; public image factors: OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.02-1.55] satisfied more general satisfaction. Similar results were found for experience with doctors (providers' expertise factors: OR, 4.50; 95% CI, 2.77-7.32; other factors: OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16-0.81) and experience with health providers and nurses (providers' expertise factors: OR, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.99-3.57; image factors: OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.09-2.14). Our study's findings suggest that to improve patient-reported experience, health providers must better manage providers' expertise factors and public image factors. Health providers can improve patient-reported experience by increasing communication skills and proper information about the nature is important. Moreover, health providers must manage public image factors comprehensively and continuously by maintaining good quality of care and to brand patients.

Should states restrict recipient choice amongst relevant and available COVID-19 vaccines?

Several COVID-19 vaccinations have been authorised worldwide. Whilst some vaccines are contraindicated for certain age groups or health conditions, there are often multiple clinically suitable authorised vaccine brands available. Few states have allowed recipients to choose amongst them, though there are multiple reasons why choice would be valued. We consider the policy justifications for state controls on recipient choice amongst COVID-19 vaccine brands, focusing on European countries and drawing on the UK context as an example. We contrast justifications for not offering choice at the height of the early pandemic crisis, and as some states seek to de-escalate their response and transition towards living with COVID-19. We argue that in the latter context public expectations of choice between available vaccine brands and platforms may rise, but that several considerations may justify continued restrictions on choice. A key factor which states should continue to take into consideration is the global nature of the pandemic. Insofar as offering recipient choice at a national level might exacerbate global inequity in vaccine distribution, states retain a normative and legal justification for restricting choice amongst available and clinically suitable vaccine brands.

Fifteen years with patient choice and free establishment in Swedish primary healthcare: what do we know?

BACKGROUND: In 2007, a reform of Swedish primary healthcare began when some regions implemented enhanced patient choice in combination with free establishment for private providers. Although heavily debated, in 2010 it became mandatory for all regions to implement this choice system. AIM: The aim of this article was to review all published research articles related to the primary healthcare choice reform in Sweden, to investigate what has been published about the reform and summarise its first 15 years. METHODS: A scoping review was performed to cover the breadth of research on the reform. Searches were made in Scopus, Web of Science and PubMed for articles published between 2007 and 2021, resulting in 217 unique articles. In total, 52 articles were included. RESULTS: The articles were summarised and presented in relation to six overarching themes: arguments about the primary healthcare choice reform; governance and financial reimbursements; choice of provider and use of information; effects on equity and access; effects on quality; and differences between private and public primary healthcare centres. CONCLUSIONS: The articles show that the reform has led to an increase in access to primary healthcare, but most studies indicate that the increase is inequitably distributed in terms of socioeconomy and geographical location. The effects on quality are unclear but several studies show that the mechanisms supposed to lead to quality improvements do not work as intended. Furthermore, from a population health perspective, it is time to discuss how such a responsibility can be reintegrated into primary healthcare and function with the choice system.

Understanding women's choices for management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 (CIN2): Qualitative analysis of a randomised experimental study.

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 (CIN2) would allow time for most cases to regress naturally and in turn avoid potentially unnecessary and harmful treatment. AIM: To determine reasons for choosing active surveillance over surgery among women given a hypothetical diagnosis of CIN2. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women residing in Australia aged 25-40 years with no prior diagnosis of cervical cancer, cervical abnormality CIN2 or above, and/or previous hysterectomy, were randomised to one of four identical hypothetical scenarios of testing human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive: high-grade cytology and a diagnosis of CIN2 that used alternate terminology to describe resolution of abnormal cells and/or inclusion of an overtreatment statement. Participants selected active surveillance or surgery after viewing the scenario and free-text reason/s for their choice were thematically analysed. RESULTS: Of the 1638 women randomised, 79% (n = 1293) opted for active surveillance. The most common reasons for choosing active surveillance included concerns about surgery and associated risks, preferring to 'wait and see', trusting the doctor's recommendations and having an emotional response toward surgery. For women who chose surgery, being risk-averse, addressing the issue straight away and perceiving surgery to be the better option for them were the most common themes identified. CONCLUSION: When presented with balanced information on the benefits and harms of different management options for CIN2 and given a choice, most women in this hypothetical situation chose active surveillance over surgery. Addressing women's concerns about active surveillance may open up the possibility that if deemed safe, it could be an acceptable alternative for women.

The voice of ostomates: an exploration of stoma care in England.

BACKGROUND: This article is part one of a series presenting the findings of stakeholder surveys with ostomates and stoma care nurses for stoma services in England. Due to the volume of data and publication limits this article focuses on the views and experiences of 2504 people living with a stoma (ostomates). AIM: To understand the experience of ostomates in relation to the current services provided in hospital and at home, the delivery of care and views on areas that work well and areas that require improvement. METHODS: Ostomates were asked to share their experiences in a national online survey, promoted via multiple organisations. The survey included sections for respondent demographics, interactions with the stoma care nurse (SCN), products and dispensing services, as well as patients' experiences relating to both hospital-based care and home-based care. Free-text responses relating to service delivery in hospital and at home were coded and thematically analysed. FINDINGS: Results are presented, and verbatim quotes used to demonstrate themes. These include care provision and access to visits from the SCN, physical and psychological care, information sharing, specialist knowledge and products. CONCLUSION: Overall, the survey respondents praised the care given, however, the experiences and views shared via the survey show significant variation in the care and services received. This article presents the findings of a survey of ostomates living in England. A second article, presenting the findings about the experiences of stoma care nurses will be published in a forthcoming issue.

'Well, what do You Want to do?' A Case Study of Community Palliative Care Programme: 'Heidi's Have a Go'.

The demand for palliative care has increased in high income countries as mortality in older adults has decreased and life expectancy increased. In this context, the priorities of palliative and end of life care (EoLC) have shifted in Australia, reflected in policy frameworks, national guidelines, service systems and funding models. However, aligning service systems and practice realities with these policy aspirations has been problematic in Australia and elsewhere. The current study investigates the recent implementation of a unique, community palliative care (CPC) programme called Heidi's Have a Go (HHaG) in regional Australia, which seemed to bridge the problematic divide between policy aspirations and practice implementation. Qualitative research was undertaken to examine the programme design and influence from the perspective of programme staff and volunteers. The data generated compelling stories on staff and patient experiences in its first 2 years, achieving service outcomes aligned with current policy and national frameworks and privileging patient voices.

Stroke patient's alarm choice: General practitioner or emergency medical services.

OBJECTIVES: Stroke patients should be treated as soon as possible since the benefit of reperfusion therapies is highly time-dependent. The proportion of patients eligible for reperfusion therapy is still limited, as many patients do not immediately alarm healthcare providers. The choice of healthcare system entrance influences the time of arrival in the hospital. Therefore, we assessed differences in these choices to obtain insight for strategies to reduce time delays in acute stroke patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with suspected acute stroke admitted to the participating hospitals received a questionnaire. We assessed differences between patients who initially alarmed the general practitioner (GP) and patients who directly alarmed the emergency medical services (EMS). Additionally, we assessed regional differences and patient trajectories after medical help was sought. RESULTS: We included 163 patients. Most patients alarmed the GP as primary healthcare provider (n = 104; 64%), and median onset-to-door times were longer in these patients (466 minutes [IQR 149-1586]) compared to patients directly alarming the EMS (n = 59; 36%) (90 minutes [IQR 45-286]). This was even more pronounced in less densely populated areas. Patients who alarmed the GP first, more often had patient delay >15 minutes, hesitated to burden healthcare providers and underestimated symptomatology. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that patients who alarmed the GP first instead of the EMS differed in several factors that are potentially modifiable. Strategies to achieve reduction of vital prehospital time delays and to improve patient outcome are optimizing public awareness campaigns and GP triage along with adjusting current guidelines by enabling and focusing on immediate involvement of the EMS once acute stroke is suspected.

Divided by choice? For-profit providers, patient choice and mechanisms of patient sorting in the English National Health Service.

This paper studies patient choice of provider following government reforms in the 2000s, which allowed for-profit surgical centers to compete with existing public National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England. For-profit providers offer significant benefits, notably shorter waiting times. We estimate the extent to which different types of patients benefit from the reforms, and we investigate mechanisms that cause differential benefits. Our counterfactual simulations show that, in terms of the value of access, entry of for-profit providers benefitted the richest patients twice as much as the poorest, and white patients six times as much as ethnic minority patients. Half of these differences is explained by healthcare geography and patient health, while primary care referral practice plays a lesser, though non-negligible role. We also show that, with capitated reimbursement, different compositions of patient risks between for-profit surgical centers and existing public hospitals put public hospitals at a competitive disadvantage.

The right of patients to make autonomous choices: Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board: a landmark decision on information disclosure to patients in the UK.

The decision in the Montgomery Supreme Court Ruling (UK 2015) has important implications for those involved in counselling pregnant women and it is suggested it is relevant not only in relation to potential risks to the baby but also potential risks to the mother. This article aims to consider the impact of the decision of the Supreme Court in Montgomery on information disclosure to patients in the UK but the decision may also have ethical implications which will be relevant in other countries.

As predicted by theory: choice and competition in a publicly funded and regulated regional health system yield improved access and cost control.

BACKGROUND: New Public Management (NPM) has been widely used to introduce competition into public healthcare. Results have been mixed, and there has been much controversy about the appropriateness of a private sector-mimicking governance model in a public service. One voice in the debate suggested that rather than discussing whether competition is "good" or "bad" the emphasis should be on exploring the conditions for a successful implementation. METHODS: We report a longitudinal case study of the introduction of patient choice and allowing private providers to enter a publicly funded market. Patients in need of hip or knee replacement surgery are allowed to choose provider, and those are paid a fixed reimbursement for the full care episode (bundled payment). Providers are financially accountable for complications. Data on number of patients, waiting lists and times, costs to the public purchaser, and complications were collected from public registries. Providers were interviewed at three points in time during a nine-year follow-up period. Time-series of the quantitative data were exhibited and the views of actors involved were explored in a thematic analysis of the interviews. RESULTS: The policy goals of improving access to care and care quality while controlling total costs were achieved in a sustained way. Six themes were identified among actors interviewed and those were consistent over time. The design of the patient choice model was accepted, although all providers were discontent with the level of reimbursement. Providers felt that quality, timeliness of service and staff satisfaction had improved. Public and private providers differed in terms of patient-mix and developed different strategies to adjust to the reimbursement system. Private providers were more active in marketing and improving operation room efficiency. All providers intensified cooperation with referring physicians. Close attention was paid to following the rules set by the purchaser. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The sustained cost control was an effect of bundled payment. What this study shows is that both public and private providers adhere long-term to regulations by a public purchaser that also controls entrance to the market. The compensation was fixed and led to competition on quality, as predicted by theory.