The Milbank Memorial Fund is an endowed operating foundation that publishes The Milbank Quarterly, commissions projects, and convenes state health policy decision makers on issues they identify as important to population health.
We focus on a number of topic areas identified by state health policy leaders as important to population health.
The Center for Evidence-based Policy at Oregon Health & Science University is a national leader in evidence-based decision making and policy design.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. Get the latest from thought leaders, including Christopher F. Koller, president of the Fund.
We publish The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to population health.
December 2014 (Volume 92)
December 2014 | Jonathan Mathers, Rebecca Taylor, Jayne Parry | Original Investigation
Context: In 2004, the English Public Health White Paper Choosing Health introduced “health trainers” as new members of the National Health Service (NHS) workforce. Health trainers would offer one-to-one peer-support to anyone who wished to adopt and maintain a healthier lifestyle. Choosing Health implicitly envisaged health trainers working in community settings in order to engage “hard-to-reach” individuals and other groups who often have the poorest health but who engage the least with traditional health promotion and other NHS services.
Methods: During longitudinal case studies of 6 local health trainer services, we conducted in-depth interviews with key stakeholders and analyzed service activity data.
Findings: Rather than an unproblematic and stable implementation of community-focused services according to the vision in Choosing Health, we observed substantial shifts in the case studies’ configuration and delivery as the services embedded themselves in the local NHS systems. To explain these observations, we drew on a recently proposed conceptual framework to examine and understand the adoption and diffusion of innovations in health care systems.
Conclusions: The health trainer services have become more “medicalized” over time, and in doing so, the original theory underpinning the program has been threatened. The paradox is that policymakers and practitioners recognize the need to have a different service model for traditional NHS services if they want hard-to-reach populations to engage in preventive actions as a first step to redress health inequalities. The long-term sustainability of any new service model, however, depends on its aligning with the established medical system’s (ie, the NHS’s) characteristics.
Author(s): Jonathan Mathers, Rebecca Taylor, and Jayne Parry
Keywords: health trainer, health inequalities, policy implementation
Read on Wiley Online Library
Volume 92, Issue 4 (pages 725–753)
Published in 2014
Integrating the Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes for Both Clinical Practice and Performance Measurement: Views of Experts from 3 Countries
Why Investments in Family Planning Are Sound Policy