Commissioning Primary Care Services: Concepts and Practice

Imelda McDermott, K. Checkland, A. Coleman, L. Warwick-Giles, S. Peckham, D. Bramwell, V. Moran, Oz Gore
{"title":"Commissioning Primary Care Services: Concepts and Practice","authors":"Imelda McDermott, K. Checkland, A. Coleman, L. Warwick-Giles, S. Peckham, D. Bramwell, V. Moran, Oz Gore","doi":"10.46692/9781447346128.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 5 reports research on the more recent policy of allowing CCGs to commission primary care services. In 2014 CCGs were invited to volunteer to take on responsibility for commissioning services from their member GP practices in addition to their wider responsibilities for commissioning acute and community services. In this chapter we explore the history of primary care commissioning and financing in England, and discuss the broad policy objectives which underpinned this significant change in CCGs role and scope. These objectives include the need to move to a ‘place-based’ approach to commissioning, and the need for a more effective linkage between the commissioning of primary and secondary care services in order to support movement of services into the community. Over time, most CCGs have moved to take on full delegated responsibility for commissioning GP services, and have established functioning primary care commissioning committees, with little evidence of significant problems associated with conflicts of interest. The development of local additional ‘quality contracts’ and investment in infrastructure and premises have been important issues, with few CCGs seeking to establish larger scale contractual changes. There have been significant local legacy issues in some areas relating to unclear contracts and poor handover of responsibilities from NHS England. The current legislation, under which statutory responsibility for commissioning primary care services remains with NHS England and is delegated rather than transferred to CCGs, presented some problems, particularly for those CCGs who wished to work together across a broader geographical footprint.","PeriodicalId":115287,"journal":{"name":"Commissioning Healthcare in England","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Commissioning Healthcare in England","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46692/9781447346128.005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Chapter 5 reports research on the more recent policy of allowing CCGs to commission primary care services. In 2014 CCGs were invited to volunteer to take on responsibility for commissioning services from their member GP practices in addition to their wider responsibilities for commissioning acute and community services. In this chapter we explore the history of primary care commissioning and financing in England, and discuss the broad policy objectives which underpinned this significant change in CCGs role and scope. These objectives include the need to move to a ‘place-based’ approach to commissioning, and the need for a more effective linkage between the commissioning of primary and secondary care services in order to support movement of services into the community. Over time, most CCGs have moved to take on full delegated responsibility for commissioning GP services, and have established functioning primary care commissioning committees, with little evidence of significant problems associated with conflicts of interest. The development of local additional ‘quality contracts’ and investment in infrastructure and premises have been important issues, with few CCGs seeking to establish larger scale contractual changes. There have been significant local legacy issues in some areas relating to unclear contracts and poor handover of responsibilities from NHS England. The current legislation, under which statutory responsibility for commissioning primary care services remains with NHS England and is delegated rather than transferred to CCGs, presented some problems, particularly for those CCGs who wished to work together across a broader geographical footprint.
委托初级保健服务:概念与实践
第5章报告了允许ccg委托初级保健服务的最新政策的研究。2014年,ccg被邀请自愿承担其成员全科医生实践的委托服务责任,以及更广泛的委托急性和社区服务的责任。在本章中,我们探讨了英格兰初级保健委托和融资的历史,并讨论了支持ccg角色和范围发生重大变化的广泛政策目标。这些目标包括需要采取“基于地点”的方式进行委托,以及需要在初级和二级保健服务的委托之间建立更有效的联系,以支持服务向社区的转移。随着时间的推移,大多数ccg已经完全承担了委托全科医生服务的责任,并建立了有效的初级保健委托委员会,几乎没有证据表明存在与利益冲突相关的重大问题。发展当地额外的“高质量合同”和对基础设施和房地的投资一直是重要问题,很少有ccg寻求建立更大规模的合同变更。在一些地区,存在着与合同不明确和英国国民医疗服务体系责任移交不力有关的重大地方遗留问题。目前的立法规定,委托初级保健服务的法定责任仍然由英国国民保健服务体系承担,并被授权而不是转移给ccg,这带来了一些问题,特别是对于那些希望在更广泛的地理足迹上合作的ccg。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信