Cargando…

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

BACKGROUND: Historically, primary medical care in the UK has been delivered by general practitioners who are independent contractors, operating under a contract, which until 2004 was subject to little performance management. In keeping with the wider political impetus to introduce markets and compet...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Coleman, Anna, Checkland, Kath, McDermott, Imelda, Harrison, Stephen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3663654/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23735051
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-S1-S3
_version_ 1782271011892232192
author Coleman, Anna
Checkland, Kath
McDermott, Imelda
Harrison, Stephen
author_facet Coleman, Anna
Checkland, Kath
McDermott, Imelda
Harrison, Stephen
author_sort Coleman, Anna
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Historically, primary medical care in the UK has been delivered by general practitioners who are independent contractors, operating under a contract, which until 2004 was subject to little performance management. In keeping with the wider political impetus to introduce markets and competition into the NHS, reforms were introduced to allow new providers to bid for contracts to provide primary care services in England. These contracts known as ‘Alternative Provider Medical Services’, were encouraged by two centrally-driven rounds of procurement (2007/8 and 2008/9). This research investigated the commissioning and operation of such Alternative Providers of Primary Care (APPCs). METHODS: Two qualitative case studies were undertaken in purposively sampled English Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) and their associated APPCs over 14 months (2009-10). We observed 65 hours of meetings, conducted 23 interviews with PCT and practice staff, and gathered relevant associated documentation. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We found that the procurement and contracting process was costly and time-consuming. Extensive local consultation was undertaken, and there was considerable opposition in some areas. Many APPCs struggled to build up their patient list sizes, whilst over-performing on walk-in contracts. Contracting for APPCs was ‘transactional’, in marked contrast to the ‘relational’ contracting usually found in the NHS, with APPCs subject to tight performance management. These complicated and costly processes contrast to those experienced by traditionally owned GP partnerships. However, managers reported that the perception of competition had led existing practices to improve their services. The Coalition Government elected in 2010 is committed to ‘Any Qualified Provider’ of secondary care, and some commentators argue that this should also be applied to primary care. Our research suggests that, if this is to happen, a debate is needed about the operation of a market in primary care provision, including the trade-offs between transparent processes, fair procurement, performance assurance and cost.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3663654
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36636542013-05-31 The limits of market-based reforms in the NHS: the case of alternative providers in primary care Coleman, Anna Checkland, Kath McDermott, Imelda Harrison, Stephen BMC Health Serv Res Research BACKGROUND: Historically, primary medical care in the UK has been delivered by general practitioners who are independent contractors, operating under a contract, which until 2004 was subject to little performance management. In keeping with the wider political impetus to introduce markets and competition into the NHS, reforms were introduced to allow new providers to bid for contracts to provide primary care services in England. These contracts known as ‘Alternative Provider Medical Services’, were encouraged by two centrally-driven rounds of procurement (2007/8 and 2008/9). This research investigated the commissioning and operation of such Alternative Providers of Primary Care (APPCs). METHODS: Two qualitative case studies were undertaken in purposively sampled English Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) and their associated APPCs over 14 months (2009-10). We observed 65 hours of meetings, conducted 23 interviews with PCT and practice staff, and gathered relevant associated documentation. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We found that the procurement and contracting process was costly and time-consuming. Extensive local consultation was undertaken, and there was considerable opposition in some areas. Many APPCs struggled to build up their patient list sizes, whilst over-performing on walk-in contracts. Contracting for APPCs was ‘transactional’, in marked contrast to the ‘relational’ contracting usually found in the NHS, with APPCs subject to tight performance management. These complicated and costly processes contrast to those experienced by traditionally owned GP partnerships. However, managers reported that the perception of competition had led existing practices to improve their services. The Coalition Government elected in 2010 is committed to ‘Any Qualified Provider’ of secondary care, and some commentators argue that this should also be applied to primary care. Our research suggests that, if this is to happen, a debate is needed about the operation of a market in primary care provision, including the trade-offs between transparent processes, fair procurement, performance assurance and cost. BioMed Central 2013-05-24 /pmc/articles/PMC3663654/ /pubmed/23735051 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-S1-S3 Text en Copyright © 2013 Coleman et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Coleman, Anna
Checkland, Kath
McDermott, Imelda
Harrison, Stephen
The limits of market-based reforms in the NHS: the case of alternative providers in primary care
title The limits of market-based reforms in the NHS: the case of alternative providers in primary care
title_full The limits of market-based reforms in the NHS: the case of alternative providers in primary care
title_fullStr The limits of market-based reforms in the NHS: the case of alternative providers in primary care
title_full_unstemmed The limits of market-based reforms in the NHS: the case of alternative providers in primary care
title_short The limits of market-based reforms in the NHS: the case of alternative providers in primary care
title_sort limits of market-based reforms in the nhs: the case of alternative providers in primary care
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3663654/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23735051
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-S1-S3
work_keys_str_mv AT colemananna thelimitsofmarketbasedreformsinthenhsthecaseofalternativeprovidersinprimarycare
AT checklandkath thelimitsofmarketbasedreformsinthenhsthecaseofalternativeprovidersinprimarycare
AT mcdermottimelda thelimitsofmarketbasedreformsinthenhsthecaseofalternativeprovidersinprimarycare
AT harrisonstephen thelimitsofmarketbasedreformsinthenhsthecaseofalternativeprovidersinprimarycare
AT colemananna limitsofmarketbasedreformsinthenhsthecaseofalternativeprovidersinprimarycare
AT checklandkath limitsofmarketbasedreformsinthenhsthecaseofalternativeprovidersinprimarycare
AT mcdermottimelda limitsofmarketbasedreformsinthenhsthecaseofalternativeprovidersinprimarycare
AT harrisonstephen limitsofmarketbasedreformsinthenhsthecaseofalternativeprovidersinprimarycare