How widespread is working at scale in English general practice?

Forbes, Lindsay J.L., Forbes, Hannah, Sutton, Matt, Checkland, Katherine, Peckham, Stephen (2019) How widespread is working at scale in English general practice? British Journal of General Practice, . ISSN 0960-1643. E-ISSN 1478-5242. (In press)

PDF - Author's Accepted Manuscript
Download (297kB) Preview
[img]
Preview

Abstract

Background Over the last five years, national policy has encouraged practices to serve populations of >30,000 people (called 'working at scale'), by collaborating with other practices. Aim To describe the number of English general practices working at scale, and their patient populations. Design and setting Observational study of general practice in England Methods We supplemented data published by the National Health Service on practices' self-reports of working in groups with data from reports by various organisations and websites of practice groups. We categorised practices by the extent to which they were working at scale, and examined age distribution of practice population, level of socioeconomic deprivation, rurality and prevalence of longstanding illness by these categories. Results About 55% English practices (serving 33 million patients) were working at scale, individually or collectively serving populations of >30,000 people. Organisations models representing close collaboration for the purposes of core general practice services were identifiable for ~5% of practices; these were: large practices; superpartnerships, and multisite organisations. About 50% of practices were working in looser forms of collaboration focusing on services beyond core general practice, e.g. primary care in the evenings and weekends. Data on organisations models and purpose of the collaboration were very limited for this group. Conclusions In early 2018, <5% of general practices were working closely at scale; about half of practices were working more loosely at scale. Data were, however, incomplete. Understanding what is happening at practice level is needed so that we can evaluate benefits and harms.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled keywords: Family Practice; General Practice; Primary Health Care; Organisational Models; Health Policy; England
Subjects: H Social Sciences
Divisions: Faculties > Social Sciences > School of Social Policy Sociology and Social Research > Centre for Health Services Studies
Depositing User: Lindsay Forbes
Date Deposited: 23 Apr 2019 16:13 UTC
Last Modified: 17 Jun 2019 09:38 UTC
Resource URI: https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/73588 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes)
Forbes, Lindsay J.L.: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4654-9520
Peckham, Stephen: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7002-2614
  • Depositors only (login required):

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year