Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2012

Open Access 01-12-2012 | Research article

Free choice of healthcare providers in the Netherlands is both a goal in itself and a precondition: modelling the policy assumptions underlying the promotion of patient choice through documentary analysis and interviews

Authors: Aafke Victoor, Roland D Friele, Diana MJ Delnoij, Jany JDJM Rademakers

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In the Netherlands in 2006, a health insurance system reform took place in which regulated competition between insurers and providers is key. In this context, the government placed greater emphasis on patients being able to choose health insurers and providers as a precondition for competition. Patient choice became an instrument instead of solely a goal in itself. In the current study, we investigated the concept of ‘patient choice’ of healthcare providers, as postulated in the supporting documentation for this reform, because we wanted to try to understand the assumptions policy makers had regarding patient choice of healthcare providers.

Methods

We searched policy documents for assumptions made by policy makers about patient choice of healthcare providers that underlie the health insurance system reform. Additionally, we held interviews with people who were involved in or closely followed the reform.

Results

Our study shows that the government paid much more attention to the instrumental goal of patient choice. Patients are assumed to be able to choose a provider rationally if a number of conditions are satisfied, e.g. the availability of enough comparative information. To help ensure those conditions were met, the Dutch government and other parties implemented a variety of supporting instruments.

Conclusions

Various instruments have been put in place to ensure that patients can act as consumers on the healthcare market. Much less attention has been paid to the willingness and ability of patients to choose, i.e. choice as a value. There was also relatively little attention paid to the consequences on equity of outcomes if some patient groups are less inclined or able to choose actively.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ahgren B, Axelsson R: A decade of integration and collaboration: the development of integrated health care in Sweden 2000–2010. International Journal of Integrated Care. 2011, 11 (Special 10th Anniversary Edition): 1-8. Ahgren B, Axelsson R: A decade of integration and collaboration: the development of integrated health care in Sweden 2000–2010. International Journal of Integrated Care. 2011, 11 (Special 10th Anniversary Edition): 1-8.
2.
go back to reference Dixon A, Robertson R, Bal R: The experience of implementing choice at point of referral: a comparison of the Netherlands and England. Health Econ Policy Law. 2010, 5 (special Issue 3): 295-317.CrossRefPubMed Dixon A, Robertson R, Bal R: The experience of implementing choice at point of referral: a comparison of the Netherlands and England. Health Econ Policy Law. 2010, 5 (special Issue 3): 295-317.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Greener I: Are the assumptions underlying patients choice realistic? A review of the evidence. Br Med Bull. 2007, 83 (1): 249-258. 10.1093/bmb/ldm024.CrossRefPubMed Greener I: Are the assumptions underlying patients choice realistic? A review of the evidence. Br Med Bull. 2007, 83 (1): 249-258. 10.1093/bmb/ldm024.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Ranerup A, Noren L, Sparud-Lundin C: Decision support systems for choosing a primary health care provider in Sweden. Patient Educ Couns. 2012, 36 (3): 342-347.CrossRef Ranerup A, Noren L, Sparud-Lundin C: Decision support systems for choosing a primary health care provider in Sweden. Patient Educ Couns. 2012, 36 (3): 342-347.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Grytten J, Sorensen RJ: Patient choice and access to primary physician services in Norway. Health Econ Policy Law. 2009, 4 (Pt 1): 11-27.CrossRefPubMed Grytten J, Sorensen RJ: Patient choice and access to primary physician services in Norway. Health Econ Policy Law. 2009, 4 (Pt 1): 11-27.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Bevan G, Helderman JK, Wilsford D: Changing choices in health care: Implications for equity, efficiency and cost. Health Econ Policy Law. 2010, 5 (Special Issue 03): 251-267.CrossRefPubMed Bevan G, Helderman JK, Wilsford D: Changing choices in health care: Implications for equity, efficiency and cost. Health Econ Policy Law. 2010, 5 (Special Issue 03): 251-267.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Vrangbaek K, Ostergren K, Birk HO, Winblad U: Patient reactions to hospital choice in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden. Health Econ Policy Law. 2007, 2 (Pt 2): 125-152.CrossRefPubMed Vrangbaek K, Ostergren K, Birk HO, Winblad U: Patient reactions to hospital choice in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden. Health Econ Policy Law. 2007, 2 (Pt 2): 125-152.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Vrangbaek K, Robertson R, Winblad U, Van de Bovenkamp H, Dixon A: Choice policies in Northern European health systems. Health Econ Policy Law. 2012, 7 (1): 47-71. 10.1017/S1744133111000302.CrossRefPubMed Vrangbaek K, Robertson R, Winblad U, Van de Bovenkamp H, Dixon A: Choice policies in Northern European health systems. Health Econ Policy Law. 2012, 7 (1): 47-71. 10.1017/S1744133111000302.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Christensen M, Hewitt-Taylor J: Patient empowerment: Does it still occur in the ICU?. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2007, 23 (3): 156-161. 10.1016/j.iccn.2006.03.002.CrossRefPubMed Christensen M, Hewitt-Taylor J: Patient empowerment: Does it still occur in the ICU?. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2007, 23 (3): 156-161. 10.1016/j.iccn.2006.03.002.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Greener I: Who choosing what? The evolution of the use of 'choice' in the NHS, and its importance for New Labour. Social policy review: UK and international perspectives. Edited by: Bochel C, Ellison N, Bristol PM. 2003, The Policy Press, 49-68. Greener I: Who choosing what? The evolution of the use of 'choice' in the NHS, and its importance for New Labour. Social policy review: UK and international perspectives. Edited by: Bochel C, Ellison N, Bristol PM. 2003, The Policy Press, 49-68.
11.
go back to reference Magnussen J, Vrangbaek K, Saltman RB: Nordic Health Care Systems. Recent Reforms and Current Policy Challenges. 2009, Maidenhead: Open University Press Magnussen J, Vrangbaek K, Saltman RB: Nordic Health Care Systems. Recent Reforms and Current Policy Challenges. 2009, Maidenhead: Open University Press
12.
go back to reference Burge P, Devlin N, Appleby J, Gallo F, Nason E, Ling T: Understanding Patients' Choices at the Point of Referral. 2006, Cambridge: Rand Europe Burge P, Devlin N, Appleby J, Gallo F, Nason E, Ling T: Understanding Patients' Choices at the Point of Referral. 2006, Cambridge: Rand Europe
13.
go back to reference Hirschman AO: Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States. 1970, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Hirschman AO: Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States. 1970, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
14.
go back to reference Lako CJ, Rosenau P: Demand-driven care and hospital choice. Dutch health policy toward demand-driven care: results from a survey into hospital choice. Health Care Anal. 2009, 17 (1): 20-35. 10.1007/s10728-008-0093-9.CrossRefPubMed Lako CJ, Rosenau P: Demand-driven care and hospital choice. Dutch health policy toward demand-driven care: results from a survey into hospital choice. Health Care Anal. 2009, 17 (1): 20-35. 10.1007/s10728-008-0093-9.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Werner RM, Asch DA: The unintended consequences of publicly reporting quality information. JAMA. 2005, 293 (10): 1239-1244. 10.1001/jama.293.10.1239.CrossRefPubMed Werner RM, Asch DA: The unintended consequences of publicly reporting quality information. JAMA. 2005, 293 (10): 1239-1244. 10.1001/jama.293.10.1239.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Birk HO, Henriksen LO: Which factors decided general practitioners’ choice of hospital on behalf of their patients in an area with free choice of public hospital? A questionnaire study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012, 12 (126): 1-10. Birk HO, Henriksen LO: Which factors decided general practitioners’ choice of hospital on behalf of their patients in an area with free choice of public hospital? A questionnaire study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012, 12 (126): 1-10.
17.
go back to reference Ubachs R: In eigen hand. Een institutioneel onderzoek naar het overheidshandelen inzake patiëntenbeleid 1945–1997. 2001, Den Haag: Ministerie van VWS Ubachs R: In eigen hand. Een institutioneel onderzoek naar het overheidshandelen inzake patiëntenbeleid 1945–1997. 2001, Den Haag: Ministerie van VWS
18.
go back to reference Commissie Structuur en Financiering Gezondheidszorg: Bereidheid tot verandering. 1987, Den Haag: SDU Commissie Structuur en Financiering Gezondheidszorg: Bereidheid tot verandering. 1987, Den Haag: SDU
19.
go back to reference Enthoven A, Van de Ven W: Going dutch - managed-competition health insurance in the Netherlands. N Engl J Med. 2007, 357 (24): 2421-2423. 10.1056/NEJMp078199.CrossRefPubMed Enthoven A, Van de Ven W: Going dutch - managed-competition health insurance in the Netherlands. N Engl J Med. 2007, 357 (24): 2421-2423. 10.1056/NEJMp078199.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Enthoven AC: The history and principles of managed competition. Health Aff (Millwood). 1993, 12 (Suppl 1): 24-48.CrossRef Enthoven AC: The history and principles of managed competition. Health Aff (Millwood). 1993, 12 (Suppl 1): 24-48.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Greß S, Manouguian M, Wasem J: Health insurance reform in the Netherlands. CESifo DICE Report. 2007, 5 (1): 63-67. Greß S, Manouguian M, Wasem J: Health insurance reform in the Netherlands. CESifo DICE Report. 2007, 5 (1): 63-67.
22.
go back to reference Maarse H: Markthervorming in de zorg. Een analyse vanuit het perspectief van de keuzevrijheid, solidariteit, toegankelijkheid, kwaliteit en betaalbaarheid. 2011, Maastricht: Maastricht University Maarse H: Markthervorming in de zorg. Een analyse vanuit het perspectief van de keuzevrijheid, solidariteit, toegankelijkheid, kwaliteit en betaalbaarheid. 2011, Maastricht: Maastricht University
23.
go back to reference Delnoij DMJ, Rademakers JJDJM, Groenewegen P: The dutch consumer quality index: an example of stakeholder involvement in indicator development. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010, 10 (88): 1-12. Delnoij DMJ, Rademakers JJDJM, Groenewegen P: The dutch consumer quality index: an example of stakeholder involvement in indicator development. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010, 10 (88): 1-12.
24.
go back to reference Friele RD: Evaluatie Wet marktordening gezondheidszorg. 2009, Den Haag: ZonMw Friele RD: Evaluatie Wet marktordening gezondheidszorg. 2009, Den Haag: ZonMw
25.
go back to reference Van de Ven WPMM, Schut FT, Hermans HEGM, De Jong JD, Van der Maat M, Coppen R, Groenewegen PP, Friele RD: Evaluatie Zorgverzekeringswet en Wet op de zorgtoeslag. 2009, Den Haag: ZonMw Van de Ven WPMM, Schut FT, Hermans HEGM, De Jong JD, Van der Maat M, Coppen R, Groenewegen PP, Friele RD: Evaluatie Zorgverzekeringswet en Wet op de zorgtoeslag. 2009, Den Haag: ZonMw
26.
go back to reference Millar R, Powell M, Dixon A: What was the programme theory of new labour's health system reforms?. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2012, 17 (Suppl 1): 7-15.CrossRefPubMed Millar R, Powell M, Dixon A: What was the programme theory of new labour's health system reforms?. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2012, 17 (Suppl 1): 7-15.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Hoogerwerf A, Herweijer M: Overheidsbeleid. Een inleiding in de beleidswetenschap. 2008, Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Hoogerwerf A, Herweijer M: Overheidsbeleid. Een inleiding in de beleidswetenschap. 2008, Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer
28.
go back to reference Leeuw FL: Policy theories, knowledge utilization, and evaluation. Knowledge, Technology & Policy. 1991, 4 (3): 73-91. 10.1007/BF02693089.CrossRef Leeuw FL: Policy theories, knowledge utilization, and evaluation. Knowledge, Technology & Policy. 1991, 4 (3): 73-91. 10.1007/BF02693089.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. 3. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. 3. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
30.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. 3. 2005, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. 3. 2005, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
31.
go back to reference NZa: (In) het belang van de consument: Het consumentenprogramma van de NZa. 2007, Utrecht: NZa NZa: (In) het belang van de consument: Het consumentenprogramma van de NZa. 2007, Utrecht: NZa
33.
go back to reference Maastricht University, personal communication, 1. 2011, June Maastricht University, personal communication, 1. 2011, June
34.
go back to reference NPCF, personal communication, 30. 2011, June NPCF, personal communication, 30. 2011, June
35.
go back to reference VWS, personal communication, 17. 2011, June VWS, personal communication, 17. 2011, June
36.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 53.2. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 53.2. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
37.
go back to reference Eerste Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. E. 2005, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer Eerste Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. E. 2005, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer
38.
go back to reference Eerste Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. D. 2006, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer Eerste Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. D. 2006, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer
39.
go back to reference van Ministerie VWS: Beleidsagenda 2005. 2005, Den Haag: Ministerie van VWS van Ministerie VWS: Beleidsagenda 2005. 2005, Den Haag: Ministerie van VWS
40.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. 4. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. 4. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
41.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. 8. 2005, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. 8. 2005, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
42.
go back to reference Eerste Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. H. 2005, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer Eerste Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. H. 2005, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer
43.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. 26. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. 26. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
44.
go back to reference van Ministerie VWS: Beleidsagenda 2006. 2006, Den Haag: Ministerie van VWS van Ministerie VWS: Beleidsagenda 2006. 2006, Den Haag: Ministerie van VWS
46.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. 38. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. 38. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
47.
go back to reference Eerste Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. D. 2005, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer Eerste Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. D. 2005, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer
48.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. 7. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 29763 no. 7. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
49.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 29763 no. 27. 2005, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 29763 no. 27. 2005, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
51.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. 11. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. 11. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
52.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 53.1. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 53.1. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
56.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 27807 no. 25. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 27807 no. 25. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
57.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 36.1. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 36.1. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
62.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. 26. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. 26. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
63.
go back to reference van Ministerie VWS: Beleidsagenda 2004. 2004, Den Haag: Ministerie van VWS van Ministerie VWS: Beleidsagenda 2004. 2004, Den Haag: Ministerie van VWS
64.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 28994 no. 80. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 28994 no. 80. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
65.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. 7. 2005, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. 7. 2005, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
66.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 60. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 60. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
67.
go back to reference RVZ, personal communication, 15. 2011, June RVZ, personal communication, 15. 2011, June
68.
go back to reference iBMG, personal communication, 21. 2011, June a iBMG, personal communication, 21. 2011, June a
69.
go back to reference Eerste Kamer: Handelingen 28994 no. 7. 2004, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer Eerste Kamer: Handelingen 28994 no. 7. 2004, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer
70.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 35. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 35. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
73.
go back to reference Grit K, Van de Bovenkamp H, Bal R: De positie van de zorggebruiker in een veranderend stelsel. Een quick scan van aandachtspunten en wetenschappelijke inzichten. 2008, Rotterdam: instituut Beleid & Management Gezondheidszorg Grit K, Van de Bovenkamp H, Bal R: De positie van de zorggebruiker in een veranderend stelsel. Een quick scan van aandachtspunten en wetenschappelijke inzichten. 2008, Rotterdam: instituut Beleid & Management Gezondheidszorg
74.
go back to reference Van de Bovenkamp H, Grit K, Bal R: Zaakwaarnemers van de patiënt: Naar een overzicht van activiteiten ter versterking van de positie van PGO-organisaties. 2008, Rotterdam: instituut Beleid & Management Gezondheidszorg Van de Bovenkamp H, Grit K, Bal R: Zaakwaarnemers van de patiënt: Naar een overzicht van activiteiten ter versterking van de positie van PGO-organisaties. 2008, Rotterdam: instituut Beleid & Management Gezondheidszorg
82.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 27807 no. 22. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Kamerstuk 27807 no. 22. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
83.
go back to reference Eerste Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 35. 2006, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer Eerste Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 35. 2006, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer
84.
go back to reference Eerste Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. C. 2006, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer Eerste Kamer: Kamerstuk 30186 no. C. 2006, Den Haag: Eerste Kamer
85.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 29763 no. 35.1. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 29763 no. 35.1. 2004, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
86.
go back to reference Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 56. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer Tweede Kamer: Handelingen 30186 no. 56. 2006, Den Haag: Tweede Kamer
88.
go back to reference Externe Evaluatiecommissie Kiezen in Zorg: Rapport externe evaluatie ZonMw-programma Kiezen in Zorg (2004–2008). 2008, Den Haag: ZonMw Externe Evaluatiecommissie Kiezen in Zorg: Rapport externe evaluatie ZonMw-programma Kiezen in Zorg (2004–2008). 2008, Den Haag: ZonMw
89.
go back to reference Howlett M, Ramesh M: Studying public policy. Policy cycles and policy subsystems. 2003, Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2nd Howlett M, Ramesh M: Studying public policy. Policy cycles and policy subsystems. 2003, Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2nd
Metadata
Title
Free choice of healthcare providers in the Netherlands is both a goal in itself and a precondition: modelling the policy assumptions underlying the promotion of patient choice through documentary analysis and interviews
Authors
Aafke Victoor
Roland D Friele
Diana MJ Delnoij
Jany JDJM Rademakers
Publication date
01-12-2012
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2012
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-12-441

Other articles of this Issue 1/2012

BMC Health Services Research 1/2012 Go to the issue