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.
Published 25 February 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b703
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;338:b703
Nigel Hawkes, freelance journalist
1 London
Few would argue with Ara Darzis vision of high quality care for all but agreeing on how to assess it is much more difficult, Nigel Hawkes reports
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
nigel.hawkes1@btinternet.com
For the NHS, quality is the crock of gold that lies at the end of the rainbow. Somehow it is always just over the horizon: an aspiration frequently articulated but never quite realised. Writing in the BMJ in 1988,1 George Godber remarked of the NHS: "It still does not have inbuilt review of quality." When the former chief medical officer died earlier this month at the age of 100, his judgment remained largely true.
Quality has repeatedly been promised. In Frank Dobsons 1997 white paper The New NHS: Modern, Dependable, we were told: "The new NHS will have quality at its heart . . . Every patient who is treated in the NHS wants to know that they can rely on receiving high quality care when they need it. Every part of the NHS, and everyone who works in it, should take responsibility for working to improve quality."
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Twitter What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses