Skip to main content

Funding for GP services for people living in care homes

The Chief Inspector of Primary Care, Dr Steve Field, has criticised GPs for charging ‘retainer’ fees for treating patients in care homes. Perhaps Dr Field is unaware that the current funding mechanism for general practice does not reflect the needs of patients with complex health problems such as those patients living in care homes? The current capitation-based payment is insufficient to fund the level of primary care support these patients need from primary care teams and should be supplemented by need-based funding. The GMS weighted capitation formula used to allocate resources to general practices is a blunt instrument and does not work well for the small groups of patients with complex health needs. For these groups of patients, needs-based funding mechanisms are more appropriate.

Patients living in care homes have complex health problems that require significant input from GPs and community staff, as well as skilled care from the nurses who work in care homes. Residents of care home are potentially high users of hospital care as well as having very high prescribing costs, and additional investment in primary care and community services can be highly cost-effective, as well as improving the care these patients receive and their quality of life. Some PCTs introduced local enhanced services (LES) for care home patients to recognise the significant input from GPs needed by care home residents. These schemes have often been continued by CCGs. The extra funding from an appropriately funded LES or other funding mechanisms is essential if patients living in care homes are to receive the level of support from the NHS they need.

Comments

Anonymous said…
From Prof Steve Field, the Pulse report was no a fair reflection of what I said in the CQC board meeting. I know that some PCTs did and Area Teams are looking at enhanced service payments to help GP who have to look after some care homes, these are locally negotiated above GMS, my point remains that this extra funding is above and beyond GMS. I fully understand the system, it is just that we have heard reports of GPs charging for what are GMS service and according to some national bodies representing care homes, GPs have even refused to register some patients in care home if they do not receive addition funds from the care home.
This comment reinforces my argument that patient with complex health need - such as those living in care homes - are taken out of standard GMS and funded through a separate needs-based mechanism.

Popular posts from this blog

Protecting Against the "Quad-demic": Influenza, Covid-19, Norovirus and RSV

As the NHS braces for a challenging winter season, it is grappling with a "quad-demic" of health emergencies caused by influenza, Covid-19, norovirus, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). This confluence of viral threats poses a significant risk to public health in the UK as well as putting strain on healthcare resources, emphasising the importance of preventive measures to safeguard public health. Public health measures such a vaccination and good personal hygiene are pivotal in reducing the impact of these illnesses, particularly for vulnerable groups. The Four Viruses: What Are They? Influenza: A highly contagious respiratory infection that causes significant illness each winter. It can lead to severe complications, particularly in the elderly, young children, pregnant women, and those with chronic health conditions. Covid-19: Though its most acute phase has passed, Covid-19 remains a concern, especially as new variants of SA...

The Hidden Cost of Cheaper NHS Contracts: Losing Community Trust

NHS budgets are under considerable pressure. It is therefore unsurprising that many NHS Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) In England will aim to prioritise price in contract awards, But this approach is a significant threat to community-centred healthcare. While competitive tendering is a legally required, an excessive focus on costs in awarding NHS contracts risks overshadowing key factors such as established community trust, local expertise, and the long-term impact on continuity of care. This shift towards cheaper, often external, commercial providers threatens to cut the links between communities and their local health services. The argument that competitive tendering is solely about legal compliance, and not cost, is undermined by the very nature of such tendering, which by design encourages the lowest bid. This approach risks eroding the social fabric of local healthcare provision, where established relationships and understanding of specific community needs are essential. Establishe...

MPH Student Presentations on the NHS Care.Data Programme

As part of a session on primary care data in the Health Informatics module on the Imperial Master of Public Health Programme, I asked students to work in two groups to present arguments for and against the NHS Care.Data programme. Care.Data is an NHS programme that will extract data from the medical records held by general practitioners (GPs) in England. The Care.Data programme takes advantage of the very high level of use of electronic medical records by GPs in England. After extraction, data will be uploaded to the NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC). The data will then be used for functions such as health care planning, monitoring disease patterns and research. The programme has been controversial with proponents arguing that the programme will bring many benefits for the NHS and the population of England; and opponents arguing it is a major breach of privacy. You can view the two presentations to help inform you further about these arguments: Arguments fo...