Identifying where hospital and community trusts are managing general practices in England: a service mapping study.

IF 2.5 Q2 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE BJGP Open Pub Date : 2024-10-29 Print Date: 2024-10-01 DOI:10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0173
Charlotte Davies, Catherine L Saunders, Fifi Olumogba, Manbinder Sidhu, Jon Sussex
{"title":"Identifying where hospital and community trusts are managing general practices in England: a service mapping study.","authors":"Charlotte Davies, Catherine L Saunders, Fifi Olumogba, Manbinder Sidhu, Jon Sussex","doi":"10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0173","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Organisations providing secondary care in the NHS in England have historically not also provided primary health care, but this is changing. Data on where this kind of 'vertical integration' is happening are lacking, making it difficult to evaluate its impact.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compile a comprehensive list of instances of secondary care trusts running general practices in England, to enable evaluation of the impact of such arrangements.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>This service mapping study comprises review, collation, synthesis, and analysis of published information describing secondary and primary care provision in the NHS in England in March 2021.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Desk-based collection, including hand-searching, of secondary care organisations' statutory annual reports. Triangulation via comparison with national data on general practices, the general practice workforce and practice contracts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>It was possible to construct a database of all instances of trusts running general practices in England as of 31 March 2021. We have identified 26 trusts running a total of 85 general practices, operating across a total of 116 practice sites. These practices have on average fewer patients and fewer GP full-time equivalents than other general practices, and before becoming vertically integrated were performing less well in the Quality and Outcomes Framework.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We recommend that national statistics recording the details of general practices contracting with the NHS should include whether each practice is owned by another organisation and whether that is an NHS trust, another public body, or a private organisation. Such data are required to enable evaluation of the impacts of this kind of vertical integration.</p>","PeriodicalId":36541,"journal":{"name":"BJGP Open","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11523506/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJGP Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0173","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Organisations providing secondary care in the NHS in England have historically not also provided primary health care, but this is changing. Data on where this kind of 'vertical integration' is happening are lacking, making it difficult to evaluate its impact.

Aim: To compile a comprehensive list of instances of secondary care trusts running general practices in England, to enable evaluation of the impact of such arrangements.

Design & setting: This service mapping study comprises review, collation, synthesis, and analysis of published information describing secondary and primary care provision in the NHS in England in March 2021.

Method: Desk-based collection, including hand-searching, of secondary care organisations' statutory annual reports. Triangulation via comparison with national data on general practices, the general practice workforce and practice contracts.

Results: It was possible to construct a database of all instances of trusts running general practices in England as of 31 March 2021. We have identified 26 trusts running a total of 85 general practices, operating across a total of 116 practice sites. These practices have on average fewer patients and fewer GP full-time equivalents than other general practices, and before becoming vertically integrated were performing less well in the Quality and Outcomes Framework.

Conclusion: We recommend that national statistics recording the details of general practices contracting with the NHS should include whether each practice is owned by another organisation and whether that is an NHS trust, another public body, or a private organisation. Such data are required to enable evaluation of the impacts of this kind of vertical integration.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
确定英格兰的医院和社区托管机构在哪里管理全科医生:服务图谱研究。
背景:英格兰国家医疗服务体系中提供二级医疗服务的机构历来不同时提供初级医疗服务,但这种情况正在发生变化。这种 "纵向整合 "的发生地缺乏相关数据,因此很难对其影响进行评估。目的:编制一份英格兰二级医疗机构管理全科诊所的综合清单,以便对这种安排的影响进行评估:对 2021 年 3 月英格兰国家医疗服务体系中描述二级和初级医疗服务提供情况的公开信息进行审查、整理、综合和分析:方法:通过案头收集(包括手工搜索)二级医疗机构的法定年度报告。通过与有关全科医生、全科医生队伍和全科医生合同的国家数据进行比较,进行三角测量:结果:截至 2021 年 3 月底,我们建立了英格兰所有全科医疗机构的数据库。我们确定了 26 家托管机构,共经营着 85 家全科诊所,经营地点共计 116 个。与其他全科诊所相比,这些诊所的病人和全职全科医生人数平均较少,而且在进行纵向整合之前,在质量与成果框架(Quality and Outcomes Framework)中的表现较差:我们建议,记录与国民医疗服务体系签约的全科诊所详情的国家统计数据应包括每家诊所是否为其他组织所有,以及该组织是国民医疗服务体系信托机构、其他公共机构还是私营组织。需要此类数据才能对这种纵向整合的影响进行评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BJGP Open
BJGP Open Medicine-Family Practice
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
181
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊最新文献
General practice characteristics associated with pay-for-performance in the UK: a systematic review. How do GPs communicate the urgent suspected cancer referral pathway to patients? A qualitative study of GP-patient consultations. Could a behaviour change intervention be used to address under-recognition of work-related asthma in primary care? A systematic review. Editorial: Global health inequity and primary care. Clinical decision making and risk appraisal using electronic risk assessment tools (eRATs) for cancer diagnosis: A qualitative study of GP experiences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1