BMJ 1994;308:426-427 (12 February)
Editorials
Purchasers, professionals, and public health
The Abrams report1 offers updated (but interim) guidance, given the "urgent need to clarify the public health function" in the light of the reforms of the NHS that have occurred since the Acheson report.2 It actually says little about the public health function and misses an ideal opportunity to further the cause of public health. It shows uncertainty about clinical advisory mechanisms, continues the tradition of professional territorialism, and reverses the current, welcome move towards a service focused on primary care. It also fails to address the tension between independent objectivity and managerial pragmatism, and it does not consider the best way of deploying public health specialists across the purchaser-provider split.
The NHS Management Executive has issued advice for purchasers requiring them to have a close involvement with general practitioners, constant dialogue with providers, shared medical advisory mechanisms, and access to clinical advice.3 The Abrams report suggests that it is . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati What's this?
Relevant Article
-
Purchasers, professionals, and public health Criticisms of Abrams report are misdirected..
- B Jacobson, T Jewell, G Scally, G Morgan, Z Iqbal, P Monk, A Wheeler, S Jennings, M Gee, and G Bickler
BMJ 1994 308: 981-982.
[Extract]
[Full Text]
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Doyle, Y., Thomas, P.
(1996). Promoting health through primary care: challenges in taking a strategic approach. Health Education Journal
55: 3-10
[Abstract]
-
Jacobson, B, Jewell, T, Scally, G, Morgan, G, Iqbal, Z, Monk, P, Wheeler, A, Jennings, S, Gee, M, Bickler, G
(1994). Purchasers, professionals, and public health Criticisms of Abrams report are misdirected... BMJ
308: 981-982
[Full text]