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.
3:59 pm
Professor Azeem Majeed said…
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.
4:52 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between primordial prevention and primary prevention?

Primordial prevention and primary prevention are both crucial strategies for promoting health, but they operate at different levels. Primordial prevention aims to address the root causes of health problems and improve the wider determinants of health. It focuses on preventing the emergence of risk factors in the first place by tackling the underlying social, economic, and environmental determinants of health. This involves broad, population-wide interventions such as: Policies that promote healthy food choices: Think about initiatives like taxing sugary drinks to discourage unhealthy consumption, or providing subsidies for fruits and vegetables to make them more accessible. Urban planning that prioritises well-being: This could include creating walkable neighborhoods with safe cycling routes, ensuring access to green spaces for recreation and relaxation, and designing communities that foster social connections. Social programs that address inequality: Initiatives aimed at reducing pov...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
5 comments
Read more

What makes a good doctor – and who gets to decide?

What Makes a Good Doctor? This is the question that Waseem Jerjes and I explore in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine . It is a key question that underpins the architecture of medical education, clinical practice, regulation, and professional identity. It cannot be answered by regulators, educators, or employers in isolation. It must be answered together – by doctors and patients – revisited throughout a career, and adapted as society and the profession change. Without that shared reflection, the danger is not simply disillusionment, but the erosion of the moral foundations of clinical work. As we enter an era when diagnosis will increasingly involve artificial intelligence and when performance metrics reward volume over value, reclaiming this question as a professional one is imperative. The integrity of our institutions – and of the practitioners within them – depends on reimagining excellence in inclusive, relational terms. A good doctor is not a flawless technician or a f...
Post a Comment
Read more