Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25716174›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2015

What do external consultants from private and not-for-profit companies offer healthcare commissioners? A qualitative study of knowledge exchange.

Lesley Wye, Emer Brangan, Ailsa Cameron, John Gabbay, Jonathan H Klein, Rachel Anthwal, Catherine Pope

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Lesley WyeSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Emer BranganSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Ailsa CameronSchool of Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
John GabbayWessex Institute for Health Research and Development, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Jonathan H KleinSouthampton Business School, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Rachel AnthwalSouth West Commissioning Support Unit, Bristol, UK.
Catherine PopeFaculty of Health Sciences, Southampton, UK.

Funding

Department of Health 09/1002/09
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe use of external consultants from private and not-for-profit providers in the National Health Service (NHS) is intended to improve the quality of commissioning. The aim of this study was to learn about the support offered to healthcare commissioners, how external consultants and their clients work together and the perceived impact on the quality of commissioning.

settingNHS commissioning organisations and private and not-for-profit providers.

designMixed methods case study of eight cases. DATA COLLECTION: 92 interviews with external consultants (n=36), their clients (n=47) and others (n=9). Observation of 25 training events and meetings. Documentation, for example, meeting minutes and reports. ANALYSIS: Constant comparison. Data were coded, summarised and analysed by the research team with a coding framework to facilitate cross-case comparison.

resultsIn the four contracts presented here, external providers offered technical solutions (eg, software tools), outsourcing and expertise including project management, data interpretation and brokering relationships with experts. In assessing perceived impact on quality of commissioning, two contracts had limited value, one had short-term benefits and one provided short and longer term benefits. Contracts with commissioners actively learning, embedding and applying new skills were more valued. Other elements of success were: (1) addressing clearly agreed problems of relevance to managerial and operational staff (2) solutions co-produced at all organisational levels (3) external consultants working directly with clients to interpret data outputs to inform locally contextualised commissioning strategies. Without explicit knowledge exchange strategies, outsourcing commissioning to external providers resulted in the NHS clients becoming dependent.

conclusionsNHS commissioning will be disadvantaged if commissioners both fail to learn in the short term from the knowledge of external providers and in the longer term lose local skills. Knowledge exchange mechanisms are a vital component of commissioning and should be embedded in external provider contracts.

Indexed as

ConsultantsContractsState MedicineAttitude of Health PersonnelHealth Planning OrganizationsHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansQualitative ResearchUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID25716174
PMCPMC4342588

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.