Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2005;331:63-64 (9 July), doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7508.63
To assess what we get for our money we need more than simple activity data
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
It must be incontestable that patients want the highest possible quality of health care, given the necessarily limited budgets allowed by governments and social or private insurers. Quality, reputation, and other similar concepts often top the public's lists of desirable features of health servicesoften in preference to specific criteria such as shorter waiting times and greater choice.1 2 But what quality of care is being provided by health services? And is the considerable extra funding that is flowing into the United Kingdom's NHS improving quality?
According to Sheila Leatherman and Kim Sutherland,3 and to answer a question posed by Richard Smith in the BMJ two years ago when reviewing Leatherman and Sutherland's earlier look at this issue,4
5 the NHS is improving, but patchily. Waiting times in England are now at a historic low, mortality is decreasing, and ratings of patient satisfaction are high. However, the prevalence of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus
John Appleby, chief economist
King's Fund, London W1G 0AN (j.appleby@kingsfund.org.uk)
Read all Rapid Responses