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 2007;334:1254-1256 (16 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.39227.698785.47
Chris Griffiths, professor of primary care, Gill Foster, senior research fellow, Jean Ramsay, senior research fellow, Sandra Eldridge, reader in statistics, Stephanie Taylor, senior clinical lecturer in health services research
Centre for Health Sciences, Barts and The London, Queen Mary's School of Medicine and Dentistry, London E1 2AT
Correspondence to: C Griffiths c.j.griffiths@qmul.ac.uk
Considerable hyperbole has surrounded the UK expert patient programme, and it has received considerable fundingbut will its impact meet expectations?
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Chronic conditions now account for 60% of deaths worldwide and are imposing an increasing burden on society and health services.1 Self management programmes are commonly used to help patients learn the skills to manage their own conditions better.2 The NHS in the United Kingdom, and countries in Europe (especially Scandinavia), Australasia, and North America have chosen specifically to use courses tutored by trained lay leaders, rather than health professionals such as nurses.3 Considerable resources have been allocated to support and run such programmes. A major attraction for healthcare planners has been the expectation that such courses will reduce use of health care and will deliver long term cost savings.4 More debate about the impact of lay led, self management programmes is needed. This article opens up this debate and examines the evidence that "expert patients" consume fewer healthcare resources, with particular reference to data from trials in the UK.
Two
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses