If a Kaiser patient moved to the NHS they would be horrified

Professor Richard Feachem

They said the US organisation, Kaiser Permanente, offered the NHS valuable lessons on how to provide cost-effective care, integrate services and use information technology to ensure efficiency.

The report also highlighted the importance of competition in the US, claiming patients receive high quality care because health firms know they can go elsewhere if they are unhappy.

A spokesman for the British Department of Health said the findings showed there was still a long way to go with the modernisation of the NHS.

Cost-effective

Kaiser, which serves more than six million people in California and eight million across the US, had waiting times to see a consultant a third the length of those in the NHS.

The organisation had twice the concentration of obstetricians and gynaecologists and three times the concentration of cardiologists.

Where hospital care was needed nine out of ten Kaiser patients were admitted within three months, compared to four out of ten NHS patients.

Kaiser vs the NHS

80% of Kaiser patients see specialist in two weeks 80% seen in NHS in under 13 weeks Kaiser gives up to 20 minutes with doctors NHS patients get nine minutes Hospital treatment within 13 weeks for 90% of Kaiser patients Hospital treatment within 13 weeks for 41% of NHS patients Kaiser cost per capita of �1360 NHS cost per capita of �1230

Professor Richard Feachem, one of the authors of the report, told BBC News Online British people should be asking questions about the standard of care they receive.

He said: "It is certainly true that the experience of the Kaiser patients in terms of access to care, the quality of it, and the friendliness and responsiveness of nurses is very much better than in the NHS.

"If an NHS patient moved to Kaiser they would be delighted with the experience, and if a Kaiser patient moved to the NHS they would be horrified."

Professor Feachem said the key to Kaiser's success was that patients spent a comparatively short time in hospital, freeing it to target resources elsewhere.

He added: "Kaiser is not creating efficiency by denying care. To the contrary, it's doing considerably more expensive procedures than the NHS."

Different patients

Responding to the findings a spokesman for the Department of Health said the study showed the NHS was 10% cheaper overall and that a comparison between two systems catering for very different patients was difficult.

Applying the same approach to other European countries would almost certainly reveal that Kaiser was more efficient than any of them too

Department of Health

But he added: "The performance achieved by Kaiser underlines that we still have much further to go in terms of modernising the NHS."

The Department of Health also said the areas where Kaiser was outperforming the NHS had already been identified and were included in the NHS Plan.

The spokesman said: "These findings do not undermine the long held view that the NHS is highly efficient compared with the great majority of health care systems.

"At most they suggest that a small part (one thirtieth) of the US population is covered by a health system that may be more efficient than the NHS.

"Applying the same approach to other European countries would almost certainly reveal that Kaiser was more efficient than any of them too."

Similarities

The research team chose Kaiser because of its similarities with the NHS, in terms of age, organisation, services provided and 'blue collar' origins.

After taking account of age and socio-economic differences between Britain and California they found the health care costs per person were similar to within 10%.

Nigel Edwards, acting chief executive of the NHS Confederation, said the study failed to take into account the full staff costs of the Kaiser system and its impact on the wider US health system.

He said: "It is very strange that the huge difference in staff salaries between the NHS and Kaiser can be written off.

"The authors don't seem to consider that being paid twice as much might significantly change ones attitude and approach."

The full study will be published in the British Medical Journal.