The impact of private-sector provision on equitable utilisation of coronary revascularisation in London

Heart

Volumn 94, Issue 8, 2008, Pages 1008-1011

  Mindell, J ^a   Klodawski, E ^b   Fitzpatrick, J ^b   Malhotra, N ^b   McKee, Martin ^c   Sanderson, C ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b London Health Observatory   (United Kingdom)

^c LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANGIOPLASTY; ARTICLE; BOOTSTRAPPING; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; FUNDING; HEART MUSCLE REVASCULARIZATION; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; HUMAN; ISCHEMIC HEART DISEASE; MORTALITY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UNITED KINGDOM;

DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HOSPITALS, PRIVATE; HOSPITALS, STATE; HUMANS; LONDON; MALE; MYOCARDIAL REVASCULARIZATION; POVERTY AREAS; PRIVATE SECTOR; PUBLIC SECTOR; STATE MEDICINE;

EID: 47849119036     PISSN: 13556037     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/hrt.2007.119875     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. McKee M, Clarke A, Tennison B. Meeting local needs. BMJ 1993;306:602.
2. Foubister T, Thomson S, Mossialos E, et al. Private medical insurance in the United Kingdom. Copenhagen: Europan Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, 2006.
3. Black N, Langham S, Petticrew M. Coronary revascularisation: why do rates vary geographically in the UK? J Epidemiol Community Health 1995;49:408-12.
4. Smith P, Sheldon TA, Carr-Hill RA, et al. Allocating resources to health authorities: results and policy implications of small area analysis of use of inpatient services. BMJ 1994;309:1050-4.
5. Klodawski E, Mindell J, Fitzpatrick J, et al. Inequalities in access to revascularisation in the NHS and in the independent centre among London residents. London: London Health Observatory, 2006.
6. Clarke A, McKee M. The consultant episode: an unhelpful measure. BMJ 1992;305:1307-8.
7. Armitage P, Berry G. Statistical methods in medical research. 3rd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific, 1994.
8. Brown MC. Using Gini-style indices to evaluate the spatial patterns of health practitioners: theoretical considerations and an application based on Alberta data. Soc Sci Med 1994;38:1243-56.
9. United Nations Development Programme. Human Development Report 2006. New York: United Nations Development Programme, 2006.
10. Shaw M, Maxwell R, Rees K, et al. Gender and age inequity in the provision of coronary revascularisation in England in the 1990s: is it getting better? Soc Sci Med 2004;59:2499-507.
11. Pell JP, Simpson E, Rodger JC, et al. Impact of changing diagnostic criteria on incidence, management, and outcome of acute myocardial infarction: retrospective cohort study. BMJ 2003;326:134-5.
12. Petticrew M, McKee M, Jones J. Coronary artery surgery: are women discriminated against? BMJ 1993;306:1164-6.
13. Majeed FA, Cook DG. Age and sex differences in the management of ischaemic heart disease. Public Health 1996;110:7-12.
14. Emmerson C, Frayne C, Goodman A. Should private medical insurance be subsidised? In: Harrison A, ed. Health care UK 2001. London: King's Fund, 2001:49-65.
15. King D, Mossialos E. The determinants of private medical insurance prevalence in England, 1997-2000. Health Serv Res 2005;40:195- 212.
16. Health Select Committee. Independent Sector Treatment Centres HC 934-I. London: House of Commons, 2006.