General practice closures or mergers: a survival analysis of contributing practice factors.

IF 5.2
Joseph Hutchinson, Michael Anderson, Rita Santos, Evangelos Kontopantelis, Matt Sutton
{"title":"General practice closures or mergers: a survival analysis of contributing practice factors.","authors":"Joseph Hutchinson, Michael Anderson, Rita Santos, Evangelos Kontopantelis, Matt Sutton","doi":"10.3399/BJGP.2026.0126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background 20% of general practices in the England have closed or merged since 2013. Little is known about factors that are associated with these closures, despite evidence on their negative impacts. Understanding these risks is important for recovering general practice. Aim Describe how differences in the patient mix, practice location, workforce, funding and quality are associated with the future risk of closure Design and Setting Multilevel survival analysis of all general practices in England. Method All practices open on 1st April 2019 were followed until 1st April 2025 or closure. We gathered data on practice population characteristics, workforce, funding and quality. Cox proportional hazards models were used to analyse how these measures were associated with time to closure. Results Practice contract type and geographic location (region and rurality) were key factors associated with closures or mergers. For example, rates ranged from 3.7% to 19.7% by geographic region. Greater risk was associated with smaller practices, with a practice at the 10th percentile (3,032 patients) having 253% (95% CrI: 200%, 312%) higher risk of closure or merger than the median (7,256 patients). Greater risk of closure or merger was associated with losing or failing to gain patients (hazard ratio v medium increase 1.68 (95%CrI: 1.44, 1.96), lower baseline funding, poorer clinical quality, higher socioeconomic deprivation and certain contract types, but not the supply of general practitioners or nurses. Conclusion The practice contract, relevant region, practice list size, funding and quality are key hazards for the subsequent closure or merger of general practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":520790,"journal":{"name":"The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2026.0126","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

Background 20% of general practices in the England have closed or merged since 2013. Little is known about factors that are associated with these closures, despite evidence on their negative impacts. Understanding these risks is important for recovering general practice. Aim Describe how differences in the patient mix, practice location, workforce, funding and quality are associated with the future risk of closure Design and Setting Multilevel survival analysis of all general practices in England. Method All practices open on 1st April 2019 were followed until 1st April 2025 or closure. We gathered data on practice population characteristics, workforce, funding and quality. Cox proportional hazards models were used to analyse how these measures were associated with time to closure. Results Practice contract type and geographic location (region and rurality) were key factors associated with closures or mergers. For example, rates ranged from 3.7% to 19.7% by geographic region. Greater risk was associated with smaller practices, with a practice at the 10th percentile (3,032 patients) having 253% (95% CrI: 200%, 312%) higher risk of closure or merger than the median (7,256 patients). Greater risk of closure or merger was associated with losing or failing to gain patients (hazard ratio v medium increase 1.68 (95%CrI: 1.44, 1.96), lower baseline funding, poorer clinical quality, higher socioeconomic deprivation and certain contract types, but not the supply of general practitioners or nurses. Conclusion The practice contract, relevant region, practice list size, funding and quality are key hazards for the subsequent closure or merger of general practices.

一般实践关闭或合并:贡献实践的生存分析。
自2013年以来,英国20%的全科诊所已经关闭或合并。尽管有证据表明它们的负面影响,但对与这些关闭有关的因素知之甚少。了解这些风险对于恢复一般实践非常重要。目的描述患者组合、诊所地点、劳动力、资金和质量的差异如何与英国所有全科诊所的未来关闭风险相关。方法2019年4月1日开业的所有诊所随访至2025年4月1日或关闭。我们收集了有关实践人口特征、劳动力、资金和质量的数据。Cox比例风险模型用于分析这些措施与关闭时间的关系。结果医疗合同类型和地理位置(地区和农村)是影响医院关闭或合并的关键因素。例如,按地理区域划分,比率从3.7%到19.7%不等。更大的风险与较小的诊所相关,第10百分位(3032例患者)的诊所关闭或合并的风险比中位数(7256例患者)高253% (95% CrI: 200%, 312%)。关闭或合并的风险越大,与失去或无法获得患者(风险比中值增加1.68 (95%CrI: 1.44, 1.96)、较低的基线资金、较差的临床质量、较高的社会经济剥夺和某些合同类型相关,但与全科医生或护士的供应无关。结论执业合同、执业区域、执业规模、经费和质量是影响全科诊所关闭或合并的关键因素。
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
小红书