Does Choose & Book fail to deliver the expected choice to patients? A survey of patients' experience of outpatient appointment booking

BackgroundChoose and Book is a central part of the UK Government patient choice agenda that seeks to provide patients with a choice over the time, date and place of their first outpatient appointment. This is done through the use of a computerised booking system. After a 2004 pilot study, Choose and Book was formally launched in January 2006. This is the first study of patient experience of Choose and Book since then.MethodsA questionnaire survey of reported experience of choice over the time, data and place of appointment, carried out in a National Health Service hospital in London. 104 patients at their first outpatient appointment completed the questionnaire, consisting of a consecutive series of patients referred through Choose and Book and a sample referred through the conventional booking system.ResultsAmong the Choose and Book patients, 66% (31/47; 95% CI 52 to 78%) reported not being given a choice of appointment date, 66% (31/47; 95% CI 52 to 78%) reported not being given a choice of appointment time, 86% (37/43; 95% CI 74 to 94%) reported being given a choice of fewer than four hospitals in total and 32% (15/47; 95% CI 20 to 46%) reported not being given any choice of hospital.ConclusionIn this study, patients did not experience the degree of choice that Choose and Book was designed to deliver.

[1]  David D Pothier,et al.  ‘Choose and Book’ in ENT: the GP perspective , 2006, The Journal of Laryngology & Otology.

[2]  M. Calnan,et al.  Trust and Health Care , 2007 .

[3]  Mike Fitzpatrick.  Choice , 2004, The Lancet.

[4]  Anthony C. Davison,et al.  Bootstrap Methods and Their Application , 1998 .

[5]  J. Newell.  Project Final Report , 2005 .

[6]  Zoë Lawrence,et al.  Building on the best – choice, responsiveness and equity in the NHS , 2004, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[7]  S. Walford,et al.  Choose and Book. , 2006, Clinical medicine.

[8]  Charlene Rohr,et al.  London Patient Choice Project Evaluation , 2005 .

[9]  Paul Bate,et al.  Choice : More can mean less , 2005 .

[10]  A. Hassey.  The National Programme for IT in the NHS. , 2005, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[11]  Paul Bate,et al.  ?Build it and they will come'- or will they? Choice, policy, paradoxes and the case of NHS treatment centres , 2006 .

[12]  John Powell.  NHS national programme for information technology , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[13]  Angela Coulter,et al.  Patients ’ experience of choosing where to undergo surgical treatment EVALUATION OF LONDON PATIENT CHOICE SCHEME , 2005 .

[14]  Alan Finlayson,et al.  Forward not Back: The Labour Party Manifesto, 2005 , 2005 .

[15]  Catarina Sismeiro,et al.  Two years and ~196 million later: where is Choose and Book? , 2007 .

[16]  Jake Chapman,et al.  System Failure , 2003 .

[17]  Frances Rapport,et al.  Evaluating innovations in the delivery and organisation of gastrointestinal services initiated directly or indirectly by the Modernising Endoscopy Services programme of the NHS Modernisation Agency: (ENIGMA): Report for the National Co-ordinating Centre for NHS Service Delivery and Organisation R&D , 2008 .

[18]  Catarina Sismeiro,et al.  Two years and 196 million pounds later: where is Choose and Book? , 2007, Informatics in primary care.

[19]  Angela Coulter,et al.  The European Patient Of The Future , 2003 .

[20]  Charlene Rohr,et al.  London Patient Choice Project Evaluation: A model of patients’ choices of hospital from stated and revealed preference choice data , 2005 .

[21]  A. Boyd,et al.  Patient Choice and the Organisation and Delivery of Health Services: Scoping Review , 2005 .

[22]  John Appleby,et al.  Public Responses to NHS Reform , 2005 .

[23]  Clifford W. Brooks.  Chapter 2 – Frame Measurements and Markings , 2007 .

[24]  I. Greener,et al.  Are the assumptions underlying patients choice realistic?: a review of the evidence. , 2007, British medical bulletin.