 |
 |
Dear Colleagues Apologies for any cross posting York Health Economics Consortium were commissioned by the English Department of Health to conduct an evaluation of the pilot scheme in England to send patients to other parts of the EU/EEA for treatment. The report by Karin Lowson, Peter West, Stephen Chaplin and Jacqueline O'Reilly can now be freely accessed at http://www.doh.gov.uk/international/report02.pdf There is also a report on the BBC website relating to publication of the report with some reactions from various parties. This is at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2190251.stm I've also attached below brief iinital information from background section of report. Best wishes David McDaid LSE Health and Social Care Background Following European Court of Justice (ECJ) rulings in July 2001, patients in the UK are entitled to receive hospital care in other countries in the European Economic Area (which comprises the European Union, Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein). Therefore, healthcare organisations in the UK, for example, health authorities (HA), Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) and Trusts, may commission treatment from other healthcare organisations within the EU. To this end, the Department of Health has been working with three pilot sites in the South- East of England to address the clinical, legal and quality issues involved in sending patients to other EU countries for treatment. The aim of the project was to implement processes and thence to publish guidance for the NHS. York Health Economics Consortium (YHEC Ltd) was commissioned by the Department of Health to design and undertake the evaluation. The timetable for the evaluation was determined primarily by the time taken to arrange overseas treatment. Evaluation Framework The terms of reference from the Department of Health (DoH) for the evaluation focused on the process of the treatment rather than the outcome. The aim of the evaluation was to produce a descriptive report on the test-bed sites, including the experiences of the key groups of participants, as well as an appraisal of the processes used. Key questions from the Department of Health were: What aspect of the process have stakeholders found worked well/badly? How highly do patients rate the non-clinical side of the care provided? How highly do the commissioners rate the non-clinical care provided? Where can processes be improved for the benefit of patients? How seamless has the care provided been? Was there clear understanding of relative roles and responsibilities? Were the contractual arrangements clear? In what ways could the processes be improved?