Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Sep;12(3):275-87.
doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00564.x.

Revolution or evolution: the challenges of conceptualizing patient and public involvement in a consumerist world

Affiliations

Revolution or evolution: the challenges of conceptualizing patient and public involvement in a consumerist world

Jonathan Q Tritter. Health Expect. 2009 Sep.

Abstract

Background: Changing the relationship between citizens and the state is at the heart of current policy reforms. Across England and the developed world, from Oslo to Ontario, Newcastle to Newquay, giving the public a more direct say in shaping the organization and delivery of healthcare services is central to the current health reform agenda. Realigning public services around those they serve, based on evidence from service user's experiences, and designed with and by the people rather than simply on their behalf, is challenging the dominance of managerialism, marketization and bureaucratic expertise. Despite this attention there is limited conceptual and theoretical work to underpin policy and practice.

Objective: This article proposes a conceptual framework for patient and public involvement (PPI) and goes on to explore the different justifications for involvement and the implications of a rights-based rather than a regulatory approach. These issues are highlighted through exploring the particular evolution of English health policy in relation to PPI on the one hand and patient choice on the other before turning to similar patterns apparent in the United States and more broadly.

Conclusions: A framework for conceptualizing PPI is presented that differentiates between the different types and aims of involvement and their potential impact. Approaches to involvement are different in those countries that adopt a rights-based rather than a regulatory approach. I conclude with a discussion of the tension and interaction apparent in the globalization of both involvement and patient choice in both policy and practice.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
A matrix of involvement.
Figure 2
Figure 2
A model of involvement.

References

    1. Arnstein S. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 1969; 35: 216–224.
    1. Wilcox D. The Guide to Effective Participation. London: Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 1994.
    1. Burns D, Hamilton R, Hogget P. The Politics of Decentralisation. Basingstoke: MacMillan, 1994.
    1. Choguill G. A ladder of community participation for underdeveloped countries. Habitat International, 1996; 20: 431–444.
    1. Tritter J, McCallum A. The snakes and ladders of user involvement: moving beyond Arnstein. Health Policy, 2006; 76: 156–168. - PubMed