Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Health Care Analysis
Published in: Health Care Analysis 4/2011

Open Access 01-12-2011 | Original Article

Government Influence on Patient Organizations

Authors: Hester M. Van de Bovenkamp, Margo J. Trappenburg

Published in: Health Care Analysis | Issue 4/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Patient organizations increasingly play an important role in health care decision-making in Western countries. The Netherlands is one of the countries where this trend has gone furthest. In the literature some problems are identified, such as instrumental use of patient organizations by care providers, health insurers and the pharmaceutical industry. To strengthen the position of patient organizations government funding is often recommended as a solution. In this paper we analyze the ties between Dutch government and Dutch patient organizations to learn more about the effects of such a relationship between government and this part of civil society. Our study is based on official government documents and existing empirical research on patient organizations. We found that government influence on patient organizations has become quite substantial with government influencing the organizational structure of patient organizations, the activities these organizations perform and even their ideology. Financing patient organizations offers the government an important means to hold them accountable. Although the ties between patient organizations and the government enable the former to play a role that can be valued as positive by both parties, we argue that they raise problems as well which warrant a discussion on how much government influence on civil society is acceptable.
Footnotes
1
Examples of disease specific organizations are the Parkinson Association, the Epilepsy Association and the Lung Cancer Foundation.
 
2
For example the Lung Cancer Foundation and other cancer organizations are part of the Dutch Cancer Federation (NFK).
 
3
In addition the NPCF receives funds from their members (other patient organizations) and some of its income comes from organized activities [37].
 
Literature
1.
Akkermans, T., & Nobelen, P. W. M. (1983). Corporatisme en verzorgingsstaat. Leiden/Antwerpen: H.E. Stenfert Kroese B.V.
2.
Backman, E. V., & Smith, S. R. (2000). Healthy Organizations, Unhealthy Communities? Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 10, 355–373.CrossRef
3.
Baggott, R., & Forster, R. (2008). Health consumer and patients’ organizations in Europe: Towards a comparative analysis. Health Expectations, 11, 85–94.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Baggott, R., Allsop, J., & Jones, K. (2005). Speaking for patients and carers: Health consumer groups and the policy process. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
5.
Baker, A. (2007). Patient involvement in a professional body: Reflections and commentary. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 21, 460–469.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Barnard, A., Carter, M., Britten, N., Purtell, R., Wyatt, K., & Ellis, A. (2005). The PC11 report summary: An evaluation of consumer involvement in the London Primary Care Studies Programme. Peninsula Medical School Universities of Exeter and Plymouth.
7.
Berk, M., Van der Steeg, H., & Schrijvers, G. (2008). Stille kennis: patiënten- en gehandicaptenorganisaties waardevolle bronnen van informatie. Julius Centrum voor Gezondheidswetenschappen en Eerstelijnsgeneeskunde. Utrecht: UMC Utrecht.
8.
Boote, J. D., Telford, R., & Cooper, C. L. (2002). Consumer involvement in health research: A review and research agenda. Health Policy, 61, 213–236.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Bouma, J. (2006). Slikken: Hoe ziek is de farmaceutische industrie?. Amsterdam: Uitgever L.J. Veen.
10.
Bovens, M. A. P. (2005). Public Accountability. In E. Ferlie, L. E. Lynn, & C. Pollit (Eds.), The oxford handbook of public management (pp. 182–208). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11.
Caron-Flinterman, J. F. (2005). A new voice in science. Patient participation in decision-making on biomedical research. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit.
12.
Cawson, A. (1986). Corporatism and political theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
13.
Clarke, J., Newman, J. E., Smith, N., Vidler, E., & Westmarland, L. (2007). Creating citizen consumers: Changing publics and changing public services. London: SAGE Publications.
14.
Collins, S., Britten, N., Ruusuvuori, J., & Tompson, A. (2007). Patient participation in health care consultations: Qualitative perspectives. Maidenhead, New York: McGrawHill Open University Press.
15.
Couto, R. A. (2001). The third sector and civil society: The case of the “YES” campaign in Northern Ireland. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 12, 221–238.CrossRef
16.
Coxall, B. (2001). Pressure groups in british politics. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
17.
Crawford, M. J., Rutter, D., Manley, C., Weaver, T., Bhui, K., Fulop, N., et al. (2002). Systematic review of involving patients in the planning and development of health care. British Medical Journal, 325, 1263–1267.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Epstein, S. (2008). Patient Groups and Health Movements. In E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 499–539). Cambridge, Massachusetts, London: The MIT Press.
19.
Evers, A. (1995). Part of the welfare mix: The third sector as intermediate area. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 6, 159–182.CrossRef
20.
Goudriaan, G., & Goris, A. (2007). Naar een volwaardige marktpositie van patiëntenorganisaties. Leiden: STG/HMF.
21.
Grant, W. (1989). Pressure groups, politics and democracy in Britain. New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, Tokyo: Philip Allan.
22.
Grit, K., Van de Bovenkamp, H., & Bal, R. (2008). Positie van de zorggebruiker in een veranderend stelsel. Een quick scan van aandachtspunten en wetenschappelijke inzichten. Rotterdam: iBMG.
23.
Hanley, B., Truesdale, A., King, A., Elbourne, D., & Chalmers, I. (2001). Involving consumers in designing, conducting, and interpreting randomised controlled trials: Questionnaire survey. British Medical Journal, 322, 519–523.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Harrison, S., & Mort, M. (1998). Which champions, which people? Public and user involvement in health care as a technology of legitimation. Social Policy & Administration, 32, 60–70.CrossRef
25.
Helderman, J.-K., Schut, F. T., Van der Grinten, T. E. D., & Van de Ven, W. P. M. M. (2005). Market-oriented Health Care Reforms and Policy Learning in the Netherlands. Journal of Health Policy, Politics and Law, 30, 189–210.CrossRef
26.
Hewlett, S., De Wit, M., Richards, P., Quest, E., Hughes, R., Heiberg, T., et al. (2006). Patients and professionals as research partners: Challenges, practicalities, and benefits. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 55, 676–680.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Jones, K. (2008). In whose interest? Relationships between health consumer groups and the pharmaceutical industry in the UK. Sociology of Health & Illness, 30, 929–943.CrossRef
28.
Klijn, E. H. (1994). Policy networks: An overview. Theoretical background and main characteristics of the policy network approach. Working paper.
29.
Klop, R., Van Kammen, J., & Van Eck, E. (2004). Patiënten doen mee bij ZonMw!. Medische Antropologie, 16, 5–19.
30.
Koopmans, R. (2003). Good intentions sometimes make bad policy: a comparison of Dutch and German integration policies. In R. Cuperus, K. A. Duffek, & J. Kandel (Eds.), The Challenge of diversity: European social democracy facing migration, integration and multiculturalism. Innsbruck: StudienVerlag.
31.
Leys, M., Reyntens, S., & Gobert, M. (2007). Patiëntenparticipatie in het gezondheidszorgbeleid: Een literatuuroverzicht en verkenning van Internationale en Belgische initiatieven. Brussel: Koning Boudewijnstichting.
32.
Lofgren, H. (2004). Pharmaceuticals and the consumer movement: The ambivalences of ‘patient power’. Australian Health review, 28, 228–237.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Mair, P. (2006). Ruling the void? The hollowing of Western democracy. New Left Review, 42, 25–52.
34.
Nederland, T., & Duyvendak, J. W. (2004). De kunst van effectieve belangenbehartiging door de patiënten- en cliëntenbeweging: De praktijk. Utrecht: Verwey-Jonker insituut.
35.
Nederland, T., Duyvendak, J. W., & Brugman, M. (2003). Belangenbehartiging door de patiënten- en cliëntenbeweging: De theorie. Utrecht: Verweij-Jonker instituut.
36.
Newcome Research & Consultancy B.V. (2006). Van goed naar groter: Een beleidsgericht onderzoek naar de groeimogelijkheden van patiënten- en gehandicaptenorganisaties in Nederland. Enschede/Amsterdam.
37.
NPCF. (2008). Jaarbericht 2007. Utrecht: NPCF.
38.
Oudenampsen, D., Nederland, T., Kromontono, E., Pepels, R., Sonneveld, R., & Stilstette, M. (2007). Patiënten- en Consumentenbeweging in Beeld: brancherapport 2006. Utrecht: Verwey Jonker Instituut, Prismant.
39.
Oudenampsen, D., Kamphuis, H., van Dongen, M. C., Homberg, J., & Kromontono, E. (2008). Patiënten en Consumentenbeweging in Beeld: brancherapport 2007 de categoriale organisaties. Utrecht: Verwey- Jonker instituut.
40.
Oudenampsen, D., Kamphuis, H., Lammerts, R., Homberg, J., & Kromontono, E. (2008). Patiënten en Consumentenbeweging in Beeld: brancherapport 2008 de categoriale organisaties. Utrecht: Verwey- Jonker instituut.
41.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, London, Roronto, Sydney: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks.
42.
Rijkschroeff, R. A. L. (1989). Ondersteuning van participatie in de geestelijke gezondheidszorg. Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam.
43.
Rijkschroeff, R., Duyvendak, J. W., & Pels, T. (2003). Bronnenonderzoek Integratiebeleid. Utrecht: Verwey Jonker Instituut.
44.
Rijn van Alkemade, E. M. (2005). Sponsoring van patiëntenorganisaties door de farmaceutische industrie. Utrecht: DGV Nederlands instituut voor verantwoord medicijngebruik.
45.
Ross, E. C. (1999). Report from the field regulating managed care: Interest group competition for control and behavioral health care. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 24, 599–625.PubMed
46.
Sattoe, J. (2009). Belangenbehartiging belicht: een dubbelrol voor PGO-organisaties. Bachelor thesis, Rotterdam: Erasmus University.
47.
Schut, F. T., & De Bruijn, D. (2007). Collectieve zorgverzekeringen en risicoselectie. Rotterdam: iBMG.
48.
Skocpol, T. (2003). Diminished democracy: From membership to management in American civic life. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
49.
Syrett, K. (2003). A Technocratic Fix to the “Legitimacy Problem”? The Blair Government and Health Care Rationing in the United Kingdom. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 28, 715–746.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Trappenburg, M. J. (2008). Genoeg is genoeg. Over gezondheidszorg en democratie. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.CrossRef
51.
Tweede Kamer (Parliamentary Proceedings) 1982–1983. 16771, no. 14.
52.
Tweede Kamer (Parliamentary Proceedings) 1991–1992. 22702, no. 2.
53.
Tweede Kamer (Parliamentary Proceedings) 2005–2006. 30482, no. 2.
54.
Vaillancourt Rosenau, P., & Lako, C. J. (2008). An experiment with regulated competition and individual mandates for Universal health care: The New Dutch health insurance system. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 33, 1031–1056.CrossRef
55.
Van de Bovenkamp, H. M., & Trappenburg, M. J. (2009). Reconsidering patient participation in guideline development. Health Care Analysis, 17, 198–216.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Van de Bovenkamp, H. M., Grit, K., & Bal, R. (2008). Zaakwaarnemers van de patiënt. Rotterdam: iBMG.
57.
Van de Bovenkamp, H. M., Grit, K., & Bal, R. (2008). Inventarisatie patiëntenparticipatie in onderzoek, kwaliteit en beleid. Rotterdam: iBMG.
58.
Van de Bovenkamp, H. M., Trappenburg, M. J., & Grit, K. (2010). Patient participation in collective health care decision-making: The Dutch model. Health Expectations, 13, 73–85.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Van Veenendaal, H., Franx, G. C., Grol, M. H., Van Vuuren, J., Versluijs, M. M., & Dekhuizen, P. N. R. (2004). Patiëntenparticipatie in richtlijnontwikkeling. In J. J. E. van Everdingen, J. S. Burgers, & W. J. J. Assendelft (Eds.), Evidence-based richtlijnontwikkeling. Een leidraad voor de praktijk (pp. 48–62). Houten: Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum.
60.
Van Wersch, S. F. M., & Van den Akker, P. A. M. (2005). Cliëntenparticipatie bij multidisciplinaire richtlijnontwikkeling in de GGZ: Ervaringskennis is geen kennis!?. Utrecht: IVA.
61.
Warren, M. E. (2003). The political role of nonprofits in a democracy. Society, 40, 46–51.CrossRef
62.
Williamson, P. J. (1989). Corporatism in perspective: An introductory guide to corporatist theory. London: SAGE Publications.
63.
Zijderveld, A. C. (1999). The waning of the welfare state: The end of comprehensive state succor. New Brunswick, London: Transaction Publishers.
Metadata
Title
Government Influence on Patient Organizations
Authors
Hester M. Van de Bovenkamp
Margo J. Trappenburg
Publication date
01-12-2011
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Health Care Analysis / Issue 4/2011
Print ISSN: 1065-3058
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3394
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-010-0155-7

Other articles of this Issue 4/2011

Health Care Analysis 4/2011 Go to the issue

Original Paper

Public Accountability and Sunshine Healthcare Regulation

Original Article

The Doctor and the Market: About the Influence of Market Reforms on the Professional Medical Ethics of Surgeons and General Practitioners in The Netherlands

Original Paper

European Health Systems and the Internal Market: Reshaping Ideology?

Original Article

Switching Health Insurance Plans: Results from a Health Survey

Original Article

The Meaning of Body Experience Evaluation in Oncology