Creating an impersonal NHS? Personalization, choice and the erosion of intimacy
- PMID: 22943560
- PMCID: PMC5060756
- DOI: 10.1111/hex.12000
Creating an impersonal NHS? Personalization, choice and the erosion of intimacy
Abstract
Background: Personalization - most often understood in terms of granting patients greater opportunity to participate in, and make choices about, the services they receive - has become a key principle guiding reform of the English NHS.
Objective: This study sets out to explore the relationship between two senses of the term 'personal' within the context of personalization. Firstly, much of the policy literature equates a 'personal' service with one that is responsive to the choices of individual patients. Secondly, the term 'personal' can be thought to refer to the intimate relationships between patients and medical professionals that have typified traditional models of good practice.
Methodology and discussion: I combine a review of the relevant academic and policy literature on personalization with a process of conceptual analysis to uncover three arguments, which suggest that personalization based on choice may adversely affect standards of care by eroding the qualities of intimacy at the heart of the care process. Thus, an unintended consequence of the drive for personalization may be the creation of an NHS that is, in an important sense, less personal than it once was.
Conclusion: Whilst personalization may deliver many potential benefits, the tension between promoting patient choice and retaining intimate professional-patient relationships ought to be taken seriously. Thus, the task of promoting choice whilst retaining intimacy represents a key policy challenge for advocates of personalization.
Keywords: NHS reform; co-production; consumer; direct payments; doctor-patient relationship; intimacy; patient choice; patient-centred; personal budgets; personalization.
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Similar articles
-
The patient experience of patient-centered communication with nurses in the hospital setting: a qualitative systematic review protocol.JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):76-87. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1072. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015. PMID: 26447009
-
Whatever suits you: unpicking personalization for the NHS.J Eval Clin Pract. 2010 Apr;16(2):310-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01390.x. J Eval Clin Pract. 2010. PMID: 20367854
-
Divergence of NHS choice policy in the UK: what difference has patient choice policy in England made?J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013 Oct;18(4):202-8. doi: 10.1177/1355819613492716. Epub 2013 Jul 31. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013. PMID: 23904238
-
Person-centered dementia care: current perspectives.Clin Interv Aging. 2016 Nov 25;11:1733-1740. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S104618. eCollection 2016. Clin Interv Aging. 2016. PMID: 27932869 Free PMC article. Review.
-
[Shared decision-making in medical practice--patient-centred communication skills].Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2011;155(42):A3777. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2011. PMID: 22027468 Review. Dutch.
Cited by
-
The rural tax: comprehensive out-of-pocket costs associated with patient travel in British Columbia.BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Aug 21;21(1):854. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06833-2. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021. PMID: 34419025 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Cribb A, Owens J. Whatever suits you: unpicking personalization for the NHS. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 2010; 16: 310–314. - PubMed
-
- Needham C. Personalising Public Services: Understanding the Personalisation Narrative. Bristol: The Policy Press, 2011.
-
- Darzi A. High quality care for all NHS Next Stage Review: Final Report. London: DH, 2008. - PubMed
-
- Wanless D. Securing Good Health for The Whole Population: Final Report. London: DH, 2004.
-
- Finlayson A. Making Sense of New Labour. London: Lawrence & Wishart, 2003.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical