R. Surender et al., THE PATIENTS VIEW OF GENERAL-PRACTICE FUNDHOLDING - RESULTS OF A CROSS-SECTIONAL SURVEY, Health & social care in the community, 6(5), 1998, pp. 370-377
Citations number
18
Categorie Soggetti
Public, Environmental & Occupation Heath","Social Work
We report the results of a survey of patients' awareness, attitudes an
d satisfaction regarding fundholding and related developments in prima
ry care, and compare the responses of patients in fundholding and non-
fundholding practices. (Six total fundholding general practices and tw
o non-fundholding general practices in West Berkshire were included.)
An anonymous postal questionnaire was sent to 1150 patients with joint
pain aged 17-80, of whom 715 (63%) returned completed questionnaires.
Few (17%) fundholding respondents had received information from their
practice about fundholding or (36%) were aware of new or different se
rvices being offered but the majority had heard of fundholding and wer
e able to describe it accurately. Satisfaction with GP services was hi
gh in both types of practice, but fundholding patients reported higher
levels of satisfaction with getting a referral to a hospital speciali
st (FH: 81% vs. NFH: 63%), and with the length of time between referra
l and treatment (FH: 81% vs. NFH: 59%). A majority of patients in both
types of practice wanted to be involved in decisions about the servic
es available to them but only a third of patients thought that fundhol
ding would make this easier. Fundholding patients were more likely to
report being given enough choice about treatments available to them (5
1%) than their non-fundholding counterparts (35%). Fundholding patient
s had not perceived a reduction in quality of care as a result of budg
etary pressures and were more satisfied with the process of referral t
o secondary care than their counterparts in non-fundholding practices.
Patients in both types of practice felt that it was important to be i
nvolved in decisions about the services available to them, but few tho
ught that this would be more likely as a result of fundholding. Provis
ion of information to patients is a prerequisite for their involvement
, but judging by the number of patients receiving any information abou
t fundholding from their practices this aspect of the reforms does not
seem to have been implemented.