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

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...

Talking to Patients About Weight-Loss Drugs

The use of weight-loss drugs such as GLP-1 receptor agonists (e.g., semaglutide, tirzepatide) has increased rapidly in recent years. These drugs can help some people achieve significant weight reduction, but they are not suitable for everyone and require careful counselling before starting treatment. By discussing benefits, risks, practicalities, and  uncertainties, clinicians can help patients make informed, realistic decisions about their treatment. Key points to discuss with patients 1. Indications and eligibility These drugs are usually licensed for adults with a specific BMI. They should be used alongside lifestyle interventions such as dietary change, increased physical activity, and behaviour modification. 2. Potential side effects – some can be serious Common adverse effects include nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, and abdominal discomfort. Less common but more serious risks include gallstones, pancreatitis and visual problems. Patients should know what to watch for a...

Abolishing NHS England will make only modest savings

Abolishing NHS England and reducing Integrated Care Board (ICB) staffing by 50% may appear substantial, but the projected savings - around £500 million annually if fully achieved - would represent only a modest increase (approximately 0.25%) in annual NHS funding in England, given the NHS England budget is approaching £200 billion per year. Evidence from past NHS reforms (like the 2012 Health and Social Care Act) shows mixed results; some efficiency gains but often offset by new layers of complexity elsewhere in NHS structures. Without parallel initiatives to streamline administrative processes, improve efficiency, and enhance clinical productivity, such structural changes to NHS England and ICBs alone will not significantly improve frontline clinical care or health outcomes. Administrative costs, while important to minimise, make up a relatively small proportion of the overall NHS budget. Genuine productivity gains will therefore require systematic reforms aimed at reducing unnecessar...