» Articles » PMID: 9692288

General Practice Fundholding: Progress to Date

Overview
Journal Br J Gen Pract
Specialty Public Health
Date 1998 Aug 6
PMID 9692288
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The cornerstone of the National Health Service (NHS) reforms was the establishment of an internal market, which separated purchasing and providing roles. As purchasers of care, general practice fundholders were seen as a pivotal part of the 'new patient-led NHS', which was intended to lead to improved cost-containment and cost-effectiveness, quality of care, and patient choice and empowerment.

Aim: To review published evidence of the extent to which these objectives may have been achieved over the past six years.

Method: Keyword search of on-line databases (MEDLINE and Econ-lit) from 1990 to 1996, plus manual search of references within those articles identified.

Results: In the absence of any formal evaluation of fundholding, it is difficult to assess the overall success of this reform. However, in terms of cost-containment and cost-effectiveness, there is mixed evidence. In some areas, such as prescribing, the evidence suggests cost-savings, although the evidence is less clear on reductions or changes in referrals. There is also evidence that suggests that improvements in prescribing may have been achieved at substantial additional administration and transaction costs. With respect to quality of care, the evidence suggests that, although quality in the procedural aspects of health provision has improved, there is little evidence about how health outcomes may have been affected. In terms of patient choice and empowerment, the evidence suggests that, whilst general practitioner choice of secondary providers has improved, little progress has been made with regard to increased consumer choice.

Conclusion: Evidence concerning the success or otherwise of general practice fundholding over the past six years is incomplete and mixed. The major deficiency concerns any effect on health outcomes that may be the result of fundholding. Until such research is conducted, the jury will have to remain out on whether fundholding has secured improved efficiency in the delivery of health care.

Citing Articles

Pharmaceutical policies: effects of financial incentives for prescribers.

Rashidian A, Omidvari A, Vali Y, Sturm H, Oxman A Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015; (8):CD006731.

PMID: 26239041 PMC: 7390265. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006731.pub2.


[Organisational reforms in the relationships between general doctors and specialists: impact on referrals].

Garcia Olmos L, Gervas J Aten Primaria. 2009; 42(1):52-6.

PMID: 19446926 PMC: 7022080. DOI: 10.1016/j.aprim.2009.02.007.


The abolition of the GP fundholding scheme: a lesson in evidence-based policy making.

Kay A Br J Gen Pract. 2002; 52(475):141-4.

PMID: 11885824 PMC: 1314221.


A healthy disposition? The use and limitations of the characteristics approach to general practice research.

Baines D Br J Gen Pract. 2001; 51(470):749-52.

PMID: 11593838 PMC: 1314105.


Primary care purchasing. Are integrated primary care provider/purchasers the way forward?.

Peckham S Pharmacoeconomics. 1999; 15(3):209-16.

PMID: 10537429 DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199915030-00001.

References
1.
Woodward A, Wilson S . Managed competition in the British NHS. More than the health service sending bills to itself?. Med J Aust. 1994; 160(8):465-7. View

2.
Bain J . Fundholding: a two tier system?. BMJ. 1994; 309(6951):396-9. PMC: 2541211. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.309.6951.396. View

3.
Kirkup B, Donaldson L . Is health care a commodity: how will purchasing improve the National Health Service?. J Public Health Med. 1994; 16(3):256-62. View

4.
Maynard A . Can competition enhance efficiency in health care? Lessons from the reform of the U.K. national health service. Soc Sci Med. 1994; 39(10):1438-45. DOI: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)90238-0. View

5.
Dowell J, Snadden D, Dunbar J . Changing to generic formulary: how one fundholding practice reduced prescribing costs. BMJ. 1995; 310(6978):505-8. PMC: 2548880. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.310.6978.505. View