The limits of market-based reforms in the NHS: the case of alternative providers in primary care

Exploring commissioners' understandings of early primary care network development: qualitative interview study

Background

Primary care networks (PCNs) are financially incentivised groupings of general practices in the English NHS. Their purpose is to deliver a number of policy goals set out in The NHS Long Term Plan. Clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) have a role in their establishment, support, and oversight.

Aim

To explore commissioners’ perspectives on the early development of PCNs.

Design and setting

Qualitative study of CCG staff using telephone interviews.

Method

Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 37 CCG employees involved in PCN establishment. Interviewees were asked about local PCNs’ characteristics, factors shaping development and form, activities to date, challenges and benefits, and their CCGs’ relationship with PCNs. Interviewee responses were summarised within a matrix and analysed thematically.

Results

Three meta-themes were identified: the multifaceted role of the commissioner, tensions between PCN policy and locally commissioned services, and engaging the broader system. Interviewees reported that the policy potentially favours those PCNs working from a ‘blank slate’ and does not sufficiently account for the fact some GP practices and wider system organisations have been doing similar work already. The prescriptive, contractual nature of the policy has led to local challenges, trying to ensure that local good practices are not lost during implementation. Interviewees also considered an important part of their work to be protecting PCNs from the weight of expectations placed on them.

Conclusion

CCGs are well placed to understand the complexities of local systems and to facilitate PCNs and working practices between wider system partners. It is important that this local role is not lost as CCGs continue to merge and cover larger geographical populations.

Extended opening hours and patient experience of general practice in England: multilevel regression analysis of a national patient survey

Background

The UK government plans to extend the opening hours of general practices in England. The ‘extended hours access scheme’ pays practices for providing appointments outside core times (08:00 to 18.30, Monday to Friday) for at least 30 min per 1000 registered patients each week.

Objective

To determine the association between extended hours access scheme participation and patient experience.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of a national cross-sectional survey completed by questionnaire (General Practice Patient Survey 2013–2014); 903 357 survey respondents aged ≥18 years old and registered to 8005 general practices formed the study population. Outcome measures were satisfaction with opening hours, experience of making an appointment and overall experience (on five-level interval scales from 0 to 100). Mean differences between scheme participation groups were estimated using multilevel random-effects regression, propensity score matching and instrumental variable analysis.

Results

Most patients were very (37.2%) or fairly satisfied (42.7%) with the opening hours of their general practices; results were similar for experience of making an appointment and overall experience. Most general practices participated in the extended hours access scheme (73.9%). Mean differences in outcome measures between scheme participants and non-participants were positive but small across estimation methods (mean differences ≤1.79). For example, scheme participation was associated with a 1.25 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.55) increase in satisfaction with opening hours using multilevel regression; this association was slightly greater when patients could not take time off work to see a general practitioner (2.08, 95% CI 1.53 to 2.63).

Conclusions

Participation in the extended hours access scheme has a limited association with three patient experience measures. This questions expected impacts of current plans to extend opening hours on patient experience.

A rapid review of the impact of commissioning on service use, quality, outcomes and value for money: implications for Australian policy

The aim of this systematic review was to assess evidence of the impact of commissioning on health service use, quality, outcomes and value for money and to consider findings in the Australian context. Systematic searches of the literature identified 444 papers and, after exclusions, 36 were subject to full review. The commissioning cycle (planning, contracting, monitoring) formed a framework for analysis and impacts were assessed at individual, subpopulation and population levels. Little evidence of the effectiveness of commissioning at any level was available and observed impacts were highly context-dependent. There was insufficient evidence to identify a preferred model. Lack of skills and capacity were cited as major barriers to the implementation of commissioning. Successful commissioning requires a clear policy framework of national and regional priorities that define agreed targets for commissioning agencies. Engagement of consumers and providers, especially physicians, was considered to be critically important but is time consuming and has proven difficult to sustain. Adequate information on the cost, volume and quality of healthcare services is critically important for setting priorities, and for contracting and monitoring performance. Lack of information resulted in serious problems. High-quality nationally standardised performance measures and data requirements need to be built into contracts and ongoing monitoring and evaluation. In Australia, there is significant work to be done in areas of policy and governance, funding systems and incentives, patient enrolment or registration, information systems, individual and organisational capacity, community engagement and experience in commissioning.

Integration and continuity of primary care: polyclinics and alternatives – a patient-centred analysis of how organisation constrains care co-ordination

Background

An ageing population, the increasing specialisation of clinical services and diverse health-care provider ownership make the co-ordination and continuity of complex care increasingly problematic. The way in which the provision of complex health care is co-ordinated produces – or fails to produce – six forms of continuity of care (cross-sectional, longitudinal, flexible, access, informational and relational). Care co-ordination is accomplished by a combination of activities by patients themselves; provider organisations; care networks co-ordinating the separate provider organisations; and overall health-system governance. This research examines how far organisational integration might promote care co-ordination at the clinical level.

Objectives

To examine (1) what differences the organisational integration of primary care makes, compared with network governance, to horizontal and vertical co-ordination of care; (2) what difference provider ownership (corporate, partnership, public) makes; (3) how much scope either structure allows for managerial discretion and ‘performance’; (4) differences between networked and hierarchical governance regarding the continuity and integration of primary care; and (5) the implications of the above for managerial practice in primary care.

Methods

Multiple-methods design combining (1) the assembly of an analytic framework by non-systematic review; (2) a framework analysis of patients’ experiences of the continuities of care; (3) a systematic comparison of organisational case studies made in the same study sites; (4) a cross-country comparison of care co-ordination mechanisms found in our NHS study sites with those in publicly owned and managed Swedish polyclinics; and (5) the analysis and synthesis of data using an ‘inside-out’ analytic strategy. Study sites included professional partnership, corporate and publicly owned and managed primary care providers, and different configurations of organisational integration or separation of community health services, mental health services, social services and acute inpatient care.

Results

Starting from data about patients’ experiences of the co-ordination or under-co-ordination of care, we identified five care co-ordination mechanisms present in both the integrated organisations and the care networks; four main obstacles to care co-ordination within the integrated organisations, of which two were also present in the care networks; seven main obstacles to care co-ordination that were specific to the care networks; and nine care co-ordination mechanisms present in the integrated organisations. Taking everything into consideration, integrated organisations appeared more favourable to producing continuities of care than did care networks. Network structures demonstrated more flexibility in adding services for small care groups temporarily, but the expansion of integrated organisations had advantages when adding new services on a longer term and a larger scale. Ownership differences affected the range of services to which patients had direct access; primary care doctors’ managerial responsibilities (relevant to care co-ordination because of their impact on general practitioner workload); and the scope for doctors to develop special interests. We found little difference between integrated organisations and care networks in terms of managerial discretion and performance.

Conclusions

On balance, an integrated organisation seems more likely to favour the development of care co-ordination and, therefore, continuities of care than a system of care networks. At least four different variants of ownership and management of organisationally integrated primary care providers are practicable in NHS-like settings. Future research is therefore required, above all to evaluate comparatively the different techniques for coordinating patient discharge across the triple interface between hospitals, general practices and community health services; and to discover what effects increasing the scale and scope of general practice activities will have on continuity of care.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Towards a framework for enhancing procurement and supply chain management practice in the NHS: lessons for managers and clinicians from a synthesis of the theoretical and empirical literature

Background

This review provides intelligence to NHS managers and clinicians involved in commissioning and procurement of non-pay goods and services. It does this in the light of ongoing pressure for the NHS to save money through a combination of cost cutting, productivity improvements and innovation in service delivery, and in the context of new commissioning structures developing as a result of the Health and Social Care Act 2012 (Great Britain.Health and Social Care Act 2012. Chapter 7. London: The Stationery Office; 2012).

Objectives

We explore the main strands of the literature about procurement and supply chain management (P&SCM); consider the extent to which existing evidence on the experiences of NHS managers and clinicians involved in commissioning and procurement matches these theories; assess how the empirical evidence about different P&SCM practices and techniques in different countries and sectors might contribute to better commissioning and procurement; and map and evaluate different approaches to improving P&SCM practice.

Review method

We use a realist review method, which emphasises the contingent nature of evidence and addresses questions about what works in which settings, for whom, in what circumstances and why. Adopting realist review principles, the research questions and emerging findings were sense-checked and refined with an advisory group of 16 people. An initial key term search was conducted in October 2013 across relevant electronic bibliographic databases. To ensure quality, the bulk of the search focused on peer-reviewed journals, though this criterion was relaxed where appropriate to capture NHS-related evidence. After a number of stages of sifting, quality checking and updating, 879 texts were identified for full review.

Results

Four literatures were identified: organisational buying behaviour; economics of contracting; networks and interorganisational relationships; and integrated supply chain management (SCM). Theories were clustered by their primary explanatory focus on a particular phase in the P&SCM process. Evidence on NHS commissioning and procurement practice was found in terms of each of these phases, although there were also knowledge gaps relating to decision-making roles, processes and criteria at work in commissioning organisations; the impact of power on collaborative interorganisational relationships over time; and the scope to apply integrated SCM thinking and techniques to supply chains delivering physical goods to the NHS. Evidence on P&SCM practices and techniques beyond the NHS was found to be highly fragmented and at times contradictory but, overall, demonstrated that matching management practice appropriately with context is crucial.

Conclusions

We found that the P&SCM process involves multiple contexts, phases and actors. There are also a wide variety of practices that can be used in each phase of the P&SCM process. Thinking about how practice might be improved in the NHS requires an approach that enables the simplification of the complex interplay of factors in the P&SCM process. Portfolio-based approaches, which provide a contingent approach to considering these factors, are recommended. Future work should focus on conflicting preferences in NHS commissioning and procurement and the role of power and politics in conflict resolution; the impact of power on the scope for collaboration in health-care networks; and the scope to apply integrated SCM practices in NHS procurement organisations.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Patients' experiences of the choice of GP practice pilot, 2012/2013: a mixed methods evaluation

OBJECTIVES

To investigate patients' experiences of the choice of general practitioner (GP) practice pilot.

DESIGN

Mixed-method, cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Patients in the UK National Health Service (NHS) register with a general practice responsible for their primary medical care and practices set geographic boundaries. In 2012/2013, 43 volunteer general practices in four English NHS primary care trusts (PCTs) piloted a scheme allowing patients living outside practice boundaries to register as an out of area patient or be seen as a day patient.

PARTICIPANTS

Analysis of routine data for 1108 out of area registered patients and 250 day patients; postal survey of out of area registered (315/886, 36%) and day (64/188, 34%) patients over 18 years of age, with a UK mailing address; comparison with General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS); semistructured interviews with 24 pilot patients.

RESULTS

Pilot patients were younger and more likely to be working than non-pilot patients at the same practices and reported generally more or at least as positive experiences than patients registered at the same practices, practices in the same PCT and nationally, despite belonging to subgroups of the population who typically report poorer than average experiences. Out of area patients who joined a pilot practice did so: after moving house and not wanting to change practice (26.2%); for convenience (32.6%); as newcomers to an area who selected a practice although they lived outside its boundary (23.6%); because of dissatisfaction with their previous practice (13.9%). Day patients attended primarily on grounds of convenience (68.8%); 51.6% of the day patient visits were for acute infections, most commonly upper respiratory infections (20.4%). Sixty-six per cent of day patients received a prescription during their visit.

CONCLUSIONS

Though the 12-month pilot was too brief to identify all costs and benefits, the scheme provided a positive experience for participating patients and practices.

Impact of initiatives to improve access to, and choice of, primary and urgent care in the England: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There were ten initiatives in the primary and urgent care system in the English NHS during the New Labour government, 1997-2010, aimed at delivering higher quality, more accessible and responsive care by expanding access, increasing convenience and introducing greater patient choice of provider. We examine their impact on demand, equity, patient satisfaction, referrals, and costs.

METHODS

Studies were systematically identified through electronic databases and reference lists of publications. Studies of all designs were included if published between 1997 and 2013, and with empirical data on the impacts above.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies of ten initiatives were included. Innovations often overlapped, complicating care. There was some demand for new provision on grounds of convenience, but little evidence of substitution between services. Patient satisfaction varied across schemes. There was little evidence on the costs and benefits of new versus existing provision.

CONCLUSION

New services generated a more complex system where new and existing providers delivered overlapping services. The new provision did not induce substitution and was likely to have increased overall demand. Initiatives to improve access to existing provision may have greater potential to improve access and convenience at lower marginal costs than developing new forms of provision.

A common evaluation framework for the African Health Initiative

BACKGROUND

The African Health Initiative includes highly diverse partnerships in five countries (Ghana, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Zambia), each of which is working to improve population health by strengthening health systems and to evaluate the results. One aim of the Initiative is to generate cross-site learning that can inform implementation in the five partnerships during the project period and identify lessons that may be generalizable to other countries in the region. Collaborators in the Initiative developed a common evaluation framework as a basis for this cross-site learning.

METHODS

This paper describes the components of the framework; this includes the conceptual model, core metrics to be measured in all sites, and standard guidelines for reporting on the implementation of partnership activities and contextual factors that may affect implementation, or the results it produces. We also describe the systems that have been put in place for data management, data quality assessments, and cross-site analysis of results.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The conceptual model for the Initiative highlights points in the causal chain between health system strengthening activities and health impact where evidence produced by the partnerships can contribute to learning. This model represents an important advance over its predecessors by including contextual factors and implementation strength as potential determinants, and explicitly including equity as a component of both outcomes and impact. Specific measurement challenges include the prospective documentation of program implementation and contextual factors. Methodological issues addressed in the development of the framework include the aggregation of data collected using different methods and the challenge of evaluating a complex set of interventions being improved over time based on continuous monitoring and intermediate results.

The Tanzania Connect Project: a cluster-randomized trial of the child survival impact of adding paid community health workers to an existing facility-focused health system

Background

Tanzania has been a pioneer in establishing community-level services, yet challenges remain in sustaining these systems and ensuring adequate human resource strategies. In particular, the added value of a cadre of professional community health workers is under debate. While Tanzania has the highest density of primary health care facilities in Africa, equitable access and quality of care remain a challenge. Utilization for many services proven to reduce child and maternal mortality is unacceptably low. Tanzanian policy initiatives have sought to address these problems by proposing expansion of community-based providers, but the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MoHSW ) lacks evidence that this merits national implementation. The Tanzania Connect Project is a randomized cluster trial located in three rural districts with a population of roughly 360,000 ( Kilombero, Rufiji, and Ulanga).

Description of intervention

Connect aims to test whether introducing a community health worker into a general program of health systems strengthening and referral improvement will reduce child mortality, improve access to services, expand utilization, and alter reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health seeking behavior; thereby accelerating progress towards Millennium Development Goals 4 and 5. Connect has introduced a new cadre — Community Health Agents (CHA) — who were recruited from and work in their communities. To support the CHA, Connect developed supervisory systems, launched information and monitoring operations, and implemented logistics support for integration with existing district and village operations. In addition, Connect’s district-wide emergency referral strengthening intervention includes clinical and operational improvements.

Evaluation design

Designed as a community-based cluster-randomized trial, CHA were randomly assigned to 50 of the 101 villages within the Health and Demographic Surveillance System (HDSS) in the three study districts. To garner detailed information on household characteristics, behaviors, and service exposure, a random sub-sample survey of 3,300 women of reproductive age will be conducted at the baseline and endline. The referral system intervention will use baseline, midline, and endline facility-based data to assess systemic changes. Implementation and impact research of Connect will assess whether and how the presence of the CHA at village level provides added life-saving value to the health system.

Discussion

Global commitment to launching community-based primary health care has accelerated in recent years, with much of the implementation focused on Africa. Despite extensive investment, no program has been guided by a truly experimental study. Connect will not only address Tanzania’s need for policy and operational research, it will bridge a critical international knowledge gap concerning the added value of salaried professional community health workers in the context of a high density of fixed facilities.

Trial registration: ISRCTN96819844

How managed a market? Modes of commissioning in England and Germany

BACKGROUND

In quasi-markets governance over healthcare providers is mediated by commissioners. Different commissioners apply different combinations of six methods of control ('media of power') for exercising governance: managerial performance, negotiation, discursive control, incentives, competition and juridical control. This paper compares how English and German healthcare commissioners do so.

METHODS

Systematic comparison of observational national-level case studies in terms of six media of power, using data from multiple sources.

RESULTS

The comparison exposes and contrasts two basic generic modes of commissioning: 1. Surrogate planning (English NHS), in which a negotiated order involving micro-commissioning, provider competition, financial incentives and penalties are the dominant media of commissioner power over providers. 2. Case-mix commissioning (Germany), in which managerial performance, an 'episode based' negotiated order and juridical controls appear the dominant media of commissioner power.

CONCLUSIONS

Governments do not necessarily maximise commissioners' power over providers by implementing as many media of power as possible because these media interact, some complementing and others inhibiting each other. In particular, patient choice of provider inhibits commissioners' use of provider competition as a means of control.