Introduction  Patient and public involvement is the cornerstone of the ‘patient‐led’ National Health Service (NHS). Though the UK has had state sponsored arrangements for patient and public involvement since 1974, they have become fragmented and unstable. Patients’ forums and the Commission for Patient and Public Involvement in Health replaced community health councils (CHCs) and their national association in England in 2003, but now will be replaced by local involvement networks (LINks) and the Commission will be abolished in 2007. Learning from history  This study provides an overview of research on the effectiveness of arrangements for patient and public involvement and reviews the debates about accountability, independence, ensuring consistency of performance, representation and how arrangements for the NHS fit within the wider agenda of citizenship and renewal of democracy. It explores key themes and areas for learning to inform the debate about how LINks might work effectively to improve the health of local people, in particular addressing issues of equity, representation and citizen engagement. Conclusions  The proposed LINks provide the opportunity to integrate patient and public involvement into wider initiatives for local democracy and citizen engagement. But debates and key issues about user and public involvement in the 1970s remain current and unresolved. If the new LINks are to succeed where forums and CHCs are considered to have failed, the strengths and weakness of both need to be understood and addressed.

Increasingly, lay people are appointed as members to health service committees. The term ‘lay’ is used loosely and the reasons for involving lay people are seldom clearly defined. This paper argues that the different roles that lay people play need to be explicitly defined in order for their contributions to be realized. Although lay members of health service committees are generally assumed to be working for patients’ interests, our observations lead us to think that some lay people tend to support professionals’ or managers’ interests rather than patients’ interests as patients would define them. We suggest that lay people fall into three broad categories: supporters of dominant (professional) interests, supporters of challenging (managerial) interests and supporters of repressed (patient) interests. These alignments should be taken into account in appointments to health service bodies. Further research is needed on the alignments and roles of lay members.

OBJECTIVES: To develop ways of reaching house-bound people and enabling them to give their views in planning and monitoring health and social care. STRATEGY: HealthLINK - a project based in a community health council - explored ways of involving older house-bound people in the London Borough of Camden, in planning and monitoring health and social care using community development techniques. RESULTS: HealthLINK set up an infrastructure to enable house-bound people to have access to information and to enable them to give their views. This resulted in access for health and local authorities to the views of house-bound older people and increased the self esteem and quality of life of those who became involved. CONCLUSIONS: Community development approaches that enable an infrastructure to be established may be an effective way of reaching marginalized communities. However, there are tensions in this approach between the different requirements for public involvement of statutory bodies and of users, and between representation of groups and listening to individual voices.

No abstract

Background. In 2004, the Irish Government introduced national legislation banning smoking in workplaces; with exemptions for “a place of residence”. This paper summarises three Irish studies of exempted premises; prisons, psychiatric hospitals and nursing homes. Methods. PM2.5 and nicotine were measured in nursing homes and psychiatric hospitals, in addition to ultrafine particles in the hospitals. In the prisons, officers (n = 30) completed exhaled breath Carbon Monoxide (CO) measurements. Questionnaires determined officers' opinion on introducing smoking prohibitions in prisons. Nursing home smoking policies were examined and questionnaires completed by staff regarding workplace secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure. Findings. Ultrafine particle concentrations in psychiatric hospitals averaged 130,000  cm3, approximately 45% higher than Dublin pub (35.5 μg/m3) pre ban. PM2.5 levels in psychiatric hospitals (39.5 μg/m3) were similar to Dublin pubs (35.5 μg/m3) pre ban. In nursing homes permitting smoking, similar PM2.5 levels (33 μg/m3) were measured, with nicotine levels (0.57 μg/m3) four times higher than “non-smoking” nursing homes (0.13 μg/m3). In prisons, 44% of non-smoking officers exhibited exhaled breath CO criteria for light to heavy smokers. Conclusions. With SHS exposure levels in some exempted workplaces similar to Dublin pubs levels pre ban, policies ensuring full protection must be developed and implemented as a right for workers, inmates and patients.