Skip to main content

Is there still a role for smaller hospitals in the NHS?

A paper published in the British Journal of Hospital Medicine asks the questions "Is there a role for smaller hospitals in the future NHS?"

The NHS is challenged by rising demand as a consequence of a population with more complex conditions and the rising costs of paying for that care. Inefficiencies resulting from fragmented primary, secondary and social care services highlight the need for greater coordination and continuity to improve patient outcomes at lower cost. Financial constraints can drive health system review, providing impetus to modify health service delivery within the NHS to maximize value and better align with the needs of our population.

The Naylor (2017) review calls for urgent rationalization of the NHS estate to meet the mandate of the Five Year Forward View. Smaller acute hospitals could be seen as a potential starting point for reconfiguring health services in England. However, local change is not always welcome and the perceived loss of services is often met with staunch political and public opposition.

The NHS Chief Executive Officer, Simon Stevens, has expressed his support for smaller hospitals. In the Five Year Forward View, smaller hospitals have an opportunity to once again be at the centre of defining patient pathways. This will require some change in provision of services. Gaining local public and clinician support will be crucial and small hospital leaders must be visionary. Support programmes such as the New Cavendish Group and New Care Models programme will be increasingly important in helping to ensure that smaller hospitals remain part of the fabric of the English NHS.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12968/hmed.2017.78.8.424

Comments

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...

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...

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...