The impact of devolution on the health systems of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is almost impossible to gauge due to a lack of information needed to make meaningful comparisons.
That is the view of a paper co-authored by the King's Fund, the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and published today (Friday 21 October) in the British Medical Journal.
The paper, Diverging Policy Across the UK NHS: what is the impact? by Arturo Alvarez-Rosete, Professor Gwyn Bevan, Jennifer Dixon and Professor Nicholas Mays, says the government, Treasury, Parliament and a host of other bodies are missing out on potentially valuable lessons from the different approaches to health policy that have been adopted by each home country since devolution.
The authors warn that in areas such as NHS spending per capita, spending on hospital and community health services and spending on family health services, they were unable to make comparisons due to a lack of credible information.
King's Fund policy director Jennifer Dixon, who co-authored the paper, said: 'There is a major health care experiment taking place at the moment with all four home nations adopting very different approaches to delivering healthcare. This has produced mixed results with England performing better in areas such as waiting times largely as a result of extra money, targets, tough performance management and probably the contestability of clinical services.
'With devolution came an opportunity to learn the lessons from these different approaches, but a worrying lack of information has made this virtually impossible. Given the billions spent on healthcare, it is alarming that we lack the reliable data we need to make meaningful comparisons of NHS performance across the four nations of the UK. Taxpayers across the UK cannot tell whether their money is being better used in England, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.'
The paper analyses the health service across all four countries during the period 1996-97 and 2002-03, but found that only a few meaningful comparisons could be made. These include:
Waiting times - between 1996 and 2002 England's waiting times for first outpatient appointment and elective admissions fell rapidly, while in Wales and Northern Ireland these statistics worsened. Because of the way waiting times statistics are collected in Scotland, it is not possible to compare performance there with other UK countries.
Across all countries, higher levels of healthcare spending have not necessarily resulted in improved health across their populations, indicating that the way resources are used may matter more than levels of funding.
The number of beds per head has fallen across all the countries at the same time as availability of hospital beds has risen.
Fellow co-author Gwyn Bevan, professor of management science at LSE, said: 'This research shows that although huge sums of money have been given to new methods of collecting information only very few comparisons can be credibly made. The methods of data collection need to be more carefully designed in order to make the information stand up to scrutiny.'
The paper further says that despite huge funding increases to the NHS over the examined period, there were only small rises in the number of clinical staff employed by the health services of each country.
Click here to download a PDFof Diverging Policy Across the UK NHS: what is the impact? or visit http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/331/7522/946
King's Fund media and public relations office: tel: 020 7307 2585, 020 7307 2632 or 020 7307 2581. For out of hours enquiries, call 07774 218439 or 07831 554927. An ISDN line is available for interviews on 020 7637 0185
Profsesor Gwyn Bevan, email: R.G.Bevan@lse.ac.uk
Jessica Winterstein, LSE Press Office, on 020 7955 7060, email firstname.lastname@example.org
The authors of the paper are:
Arturo Alvarez-Rosete, researcher, King's Fund
Gwyn Bevan, professor of management science, Department of Operational Research, London School of Economics and Political Science
Nicholas Mays, professor of health policy, Health Services Research Unit, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Jennifer Dixon, director of policy, King's Fund
The King's Fund is an independent charitable foundation working for better health, especially in London. We carry out research, policy analysis and development activities, working on our own, in partnerships, and through funding. We are a major resource to people working in health, offering leadership development programmes; seminars and workshops; publications; information and library services; and conference and meeting facilities.
UK health services 'hard to compare' (22 Oct 05)
There is a lack of information available to compare the performance of health services across the UK, the British Medical Journal reported yesterday. The King's Fund think-tank and LSE said the impact of devolution was difficult to gauge due to lack of data.
NHS data out of sync, says study (21 Oct 05)
The health service is suffering from a lack of comparable information on the four nations of the UK, researchers have claimed. A King's Fund and LSE study published in the British Medical Journal on Friday reported an "alarming" lack of equivalent data.
BBC News Online
NHS devolution lessons 'missed' (21 Oct 05)
Gwyn Bevan, LSE, co-author of the report quoted.
Lack of comparable NHS data shown (21 October 05)
There is an "alarming" lack of information available to compare the performance of the health services in the four nations of the UK, a report has said. The report, involving researchers from the King's Fund think-tank and LSE, said the Government and other bodies were missing out on potentially valuable lessons from different approaches to health policy that had been adopted in the different nations. Gwyn Bevan, LSE, is one of the authors of a paper quoted.
Setting national targets proves a tonic for English health services (21 Oct 05)
Gwyn Bevan, LSE, is one of the authors of a paper published in the British Medical Journal on the results from increased level of competition in the NHS in England and the rest of the UK.
21 October 2005