Cargando…

Postcode lottery? Do clinical commissioning groups differ in their funding of prominent ear correction surgery

In 2013 Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) were created and became responsible for the planning and commissioning of health care services in their area. The Royal College of Surgeons and the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons created guideline for the CCGs in 201...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Smith, Kirsty M., Haeney, James A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7061533/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32158903
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpra.2019.10.005
_version_ 1783504405525430272
author Smith, Kirsty M.
Haeney, James A.
author_facet Smith, Kirsty M.
Haeney, James A.
author_sort Smith, Kirsty M.
collection PubMed
description In 2013 Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) were created and became responsible for the planning and commissioning of health care services in their area. The Royal College of Surgeons and the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons created guideline for the CCGs in 2013 for the surgical treatment of prominent ears. By looking at each of the CCGs’ websites, we aim to review their equity and how well they adhere to standards to determine whether there is a regional variation for funding of this procedure. We found that 47% of the CCGs will fund this procedure only on an exceptionality basis, compared to 26% who had set criteria and would allow funding if these criteria were met. There was significant variation in the age at which funding would be considered with some CCGs allowing funding from 5 years of age and others not providing it until as old as 11 years. Only 11 policies made any reference to cartilage moulding and only 3 mentioned funding to allow correct fitting of hearing aids. Unfortunately, despite recommendations from the Royal College of Surgeons and the British Association of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, there is still variation in funding criteria between CCGs for correction of prominent ear surgery. This may result in patients being treated differently depending on their postcode. We would urge commissioners to apply more consistent and uniform guidelines for the funding of surgical correction of prominent ears.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7061533
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70615332020-03-10 Postcode lottery? Do clinical commissioning groups differ in their funding of prominent ear correction surgery Smith, Kirsty M. Haeney, James A. JPRAS Open Original Article In 2013 Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) were created and became responsible for the planning and commissioning of health care services in their area. The Royal College of Surgeons and the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons created guideline for the CCGs in 2013 for the surgical treatment of prominent ears. By looking at each of the CCGs’ websites, we aim to review their equity and how well they adhere to standards to determine whether there is a regional variation for funding of this procedure. We found that 47% of the CCGs will fund this procedure only on an exceptionality basis, compared to 26% who had set criteria and would allow funding if these criteria were met. There was significant variation in the age at which funding would be considered with some CCGs allowing funding from 5 years of age and others not providing it until as old as 11 years. Only 11 policies made any reference to cartilage moulding and only 3 mentioned funding to allow correct fitting of hearing aids. Unfortunately, despite recommendations from the Royal College of Surgeons and the British Association of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, there is still variation in funding criteria between CCGs for correction of prominent ear surgery. This may result in patients being treated differently depending on their postcode. We would urge commissioners to apply more consistent and uniform guidelines for the funding of surgical correction of prominent ears. Elsevier 2019-11-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7061533/ /pubmed/32158903 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpra.2019.10.005 Text en © 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Smith, Kirsty M.
Haeney, James A.
Postcode lottery? Do clinical commissioning groups differ in their funding of prominent ear correction surgery
title Postcode lottery? Do clinical commissioning groups differ in their funding of prominent ear correction surgery
title_full Postcode lottery? Do clinical commissioning groups differ in their funding of prominent ear correction surgery
title_fullStr Postcode lottery? Do clinical commissioning groups differ in their funding of prominent ear correction surgery
title_full_unstemmed Postcode lottery? Do clinical commissioning groups differ in their funding of prominent ear correction surgery
title_short Postcode lottery? Do clinical commissioning groups differ in their funding of prominent ear correction surgery
title_sort postcode lottery? do clinical commissioning groups differ in their funding of prominent ear correction surgery
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7061533/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32158903
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpra.2019.10.005
work_keys_str_mv AT smithkirstym postcodelotterydoclinicalcommissioninggroupsdifferintheirfundingofprominentearcorrectionsurgery
AT haeneyjamesa postcodelotterydoclinicalcommissioninggroupsdifferintheirfundingofprominentearcorrectionsurgery