The experience of implementing choice at point of referral: a comparison of the Netherlands and England

Abstract

The implementation of choice for patients over where and when they are seen by specialists in hospital outpatient clinics has been supported by electronic referral systems in England and the Netherlands. This paper compares the implementation of 'Choose and Book' in England and 'ZorgDomein' in a region of the Netherlands. For England the analysis draws on national data and published studies on 'Choose and Book', national patient surveys, and qualitative data based on general practitioner (GP) focus groups. For the Netherlands the analysis draws on qualitative data collected during observational study as well as survey data among patients, GPs and medical specialists. We find that despite significant differences in the genesis and design of the policy, similar challenges have been faced. The electronic referral systems have forced changes to the process of care at the interface between primary and secondary care and standardisation between practices. Although these changes have the potential to generate improvements and benefits, for example, convenience, certainty and choice for patients and efficiency gains through for example reduced do not attend rates, repeat consultations and duplicative diagnostic tests; they have also generated problems during implementation including GP resistance. Policy ambitions for patient choice may not be realised if the implementation of the booking system is not carefully designed and evaluated.

Advantages and limitations of virtual online consultations in a NHS acute trust: the VOCAL mixed-methods study

“…facilitating prescription ordering, 66 appointment booking 67,68 and patients' access to their online record 69 ) have demonstrated proof of concept. [70][71][72] However, such portals are often not widely used by patients beyond the research setting.…”

Using Private Social Care Services in Finland: Free or Forced Choices for Older People?

“…The term 'free choice' is often discussed in the health and social care policy. Free choice is generally considered as an approach to initiate users' autonomy as well as to encourage users' active participation in the care process (Greener, 2003;Dixon et al, 2010;Victoor et al, 2012a). Many scholars consider this approach as a way to increase provider's responsibility, to increase consumers' value and to promote care quality (Christensen & Hewitt-Taylor, 2007;Greener, 2007).…”

Changing choices in health care: implications for equity, efficiency and cost

“…Within England (Bevan and van de Ven, 2010;Dixon et al, 2010), the emphasis is on patient's choice between public and private providers in a quasi market; those who want to pay more have to opt out of the NHS and pay the full costs of private care. Patient's choice is seen as key to delivering responsive, patient-centred services by offering powerful incentives for providers to improve the quality of their services.…”

“…In this set of countries, the emphasis is on increasing choice of hospital for elective care (Bevan and van de Ven, 2010;Dixon et al, 2010;Or et al, 2010).…”