NHS privatisation linked to 557 ‘treatable’ deaths in five years | Oxford University researchers found relative spend on outsourcing was associated with deaths from certain illnesses

9 comments

  1. > The study found that, on average, every additional 1% of annual CCG budgets that went on outsourcing was associated with a rise in treatable mortality of 0.38% (0.29 deaths per 100,000 population) the following year.

    Co-author Dr Aaron Reeves:
    > “These results clearly have implications for the NHS privatisation debate, suggesting that increased outsourcing to the private sector could lead to a decline in the quality of care provided to patients.

    > “While more research is needed to determine the precise causes of the declining quality of healthcare in England, our findings suggest that further increases in NHS privatisation would be a mistake.”

    [We Own It](https://weownit.org.uk/) director Cat Hobbs:
    > “This devastating study demonstrates a trend we have seen across the world – wherever privatisation is introduced, healthcare gets less equal and public health suffers.

    > “Privatisation and outsourcing in our NHS has been disastrous for patients. It isn’t just inefficient and wasteful, it can literally be the difference between life and death. This is unsurprising when you look at mortality rates in America where privatisation is further advanced.

    > “It’s time for the government to stop risking lives in their ideological pursuit of privatisation and commit to reinstating the NHS as a fully public and properly funded service. Our healthcare system must work for people, not profit.”

  2. Just waiting for the usual right wing apologists to come along. Let me get the bingo card started:

    ‘private sector in the NHS is nothing new, see GPs’… (Ignoring that 2012 saw a large increase in privatisation, and privatisation of services that previously were kept in house)

  4. >Whilst the relationship is statistically significant – meaning it is not likely to be down to chance – the researchers said the findings are not evidence of a causal relationship between outsourcing and mortality rates, meaning other factors may also be involved. They adjusted the data for changes to population, demographics and poverty levels.
    It is not known if particular types of outsourced provision have a specific impact on treatable mortality.

    We know that spend on private care has been rising over the last 20 years:

    [https://fullfact.org/health/how-much-more-nhs-spending-private-providers/](https://fullfact.org/health/how-much-more-nhs-spending-private-providers/)

    We need more research to figure out where it’s ok to privatise, where it may be cost efficient, and where it would actually cost lives.

    I don’t believe there is this magic line of NHS Good and Private Bad. Some private is fine (look at most of europe), but we need to get better at identifying what is good and what is not, and make considerations beyond financial costs when selecting a provider.

    I’m glad that the new health and care act will roll back some requirements to have tendering, making it possible to insource things that we have been forced to put out for tender.

  5. “Whilst the relationship is statistically significant – meaning it is not likely to be down to chance – the researchers said the findings are not evidence of a causal relationship between outsourcing and mortality rates, meaning other factors may also be involved”

    “While more research is needed to determine the precise causes of the declining quality of healthcare in England, our findings suggest that further increases in NHS privatisation would be a mistake.”

    how a conclusion be made when itself states its not evidence?

    Am I misinterpreting?, the guardian also says this is speculative (kind of in small writing).

    also: Author – Benjamin Goodair – phd student.?

    Yes there’s enough to warrant more study but we should be looking at a higher standard of work before using as a silver bullet. This hurts us all in the long term.

    ​

    edit: downvoted for reading article and mentioning concerns. sums up this sub.

  7. Ok, but how much money did it make for shareholders? Can we please stick to concentrating on the important things here.

Leave a Reply