Pricing in the English NHS quasi market: a national study of the allocation of financial risk through contracts

The authors investigated how the formal national provisions for pricing in the National Health Service (which are a form of prospective payment, known as ‘Payment by Results’) are operationalized at local level. Transactions costs theory and existing evidence predict that actual practice often does not comply with contractual rules. A national study of pricing between 2011 and 2015 confirms this and indicates that such payment systems may not be appropriate to address the current financial and organizational challenges facing the NHS. As the NHS struggles radically to reconfigure services, it is necessary to reconsider the appropriateness of a wider range of pricing mechanisms to facilitate moving care out of hospitals

Facilitating stroke care planning through simulation modelling.

Stroke is a leading cause of death and long-term severe disability. A major difficulty facing stroke care provision in the UK is the lack of service integration between the many authorities, professionals and stakeholders involved in the process. The objective of this article is to describe a prototype model to support integrative planning for local stroke care services.The model maps the flow of care in the acute and community segments of the care pathway for stroke patients and allows exploring alternatives for care provision. Simulation modelling can help to develop an understanding of the systemic impact of service change and improve the design and targeting of future services

Views of NHS commissioners on commissioning support provision. Evidence from a qualitative study examining the early development of clinical commissioning groups in England

Objective: The 2010 healthcare reform in England introduced primary care-led commissioning in the National Health Service (NHS) by establishing clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). A key factor for the success of the reform is the provision of excellent commissioning support services to CCGs. The Government's aim is to create a vibrant market of competing providers of such services (from both for-profit and not-for-profit sectors). Until this market develops, however, commissioning support units (CSUs) have been created from which CCGs are buying commissioning support functions. This study explored the attitudes of CCGs towards outsourcing commissioning support functions during the initial stage of the reform. Design: The research took place between September 2011 and June 2012. We used a case study research design in eight CCGs, conducting in-depth interviews, observation of meetings and analysis of policy documents. Setting/participants: We conducted 96 interviews and observed 146 meetings (a total of approximately 439 h). Results: Many CCGs were reluctant to outsource core commissioning support functions (such as contracting) for fear of losing local knowledge and trusted relationships. Others were disappointed by the absence of choice and saw CSUs as monopolies and a recreation of the abolished PCTs. Many expressed doubts about the expectation that outsourcing of commissioning support functions will result in lower administrative costs. Conclusions: Given the nature of healthcare commissioning, outsourcing vital commissioning support functions may not be the preferred option of CCGs. Considerations of high transaction costs, and the risk of fragmentation of services and loss of trusted relationships involved in short-term contracting, may lead most CCGs to decide to form long-term partnerships with commissioning support suppliers in the future. This option, however, limits competition by creating ‘network closure’ and calls into question the Government's intention to create a vibrant market of commissioning support provision

Engaging GPs in commissioning: realist evaluation of the early experiences of Clinical Commissioning Groups in the English NHS.

Objectives To explore the 'added value' that general practitioners (GPs) bring to commissioning in the English NHS. We describe the experience of Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in the context of previous clinically led commissioning policy initiatives. Methods Realist evaluation. We identified the programme theories underlying the claims made about GP 'added value' in commissioning from interviews with key informants. We tested these theories against observational data from four case study sites to explore whether and how these claims were borne out in practice. Results The complexity of CCG structures means CCGs are quite different from one another with different distributions of responsibilities between the various committees. This makes it difficult to compare CCGs with one another. Greater GP involvement was important but it was not clear where and how GPs could add most value. We identified some of the mechanisms and conditions which enable CCGs to maximize the 'added value' that GPs bring to commissioning. Conclusion To maximize the value of clinical input, CCGs need to invest time and effort in preparing those involved, ensuring that they systematically gather evidence about service gaps and problems from their members, and engaging members in debate about the future shape of services

Developing architecture of system management in the English NHS: evidence from a qualitative study of three Integrated Care Systems.

OBJECTIVE: Integrated Care Systems (ICSs) mark a change in the English National Health Service to more collaborative interorganisational working. We explored how effective the ICS form of collaboration is in achieving its goals by investigating how ICSs were developing, how system partners were balancing organisational and system responsibilities, how partners could be held to account and how local priorities were being reconciled with ICS priorities. DESIGN: We carried out detailed case studies in three ICSs, each consisting of a system and its partners, using interviews, documentary analysis and meeting observations. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We conducted 64 in-depth, semistructured interviews with director-level representatives of ICS partners and observed eight meetings (three in case study 1, three in case study 2 and two in case study 3). RESULTS: Collaborative working was welcomed by system members. The agreement of local governance arrangements was ongoing and challenging. System members found it difficult to balance system and individual responsibilities, with concerns that system priorities could run counter to organisational interests. Conflicts of interest were seen as inherent, but the benefits of collaborative decision-making were perceived to outweigh risks. There were multiple examples of work being carried out across systems and 'places' to share resources, change resource allocation and improve partnership working. Some interviewees reported reticence addressing difficult issues collaboratively, and that organisations' statutory accountabilities were allowing a 'retreat' from the confrontation of difficult issues facing systems, such as agreeing action to achieve financial sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: There remain significant challenges regarding agreeing governance, accountability and decision-making arrangements which are particularly important due to the recent Health and Care Act 2022 which gave ICSs allocative functions for the majority of health resources for local populations. An arbiter who is independent of the ICS may be required to resolve disputes, along with increased support for shaping governance arrangements

Developing architecture of system management in the English NHS: evidence from a qualitative study of three Integrated Care Systems

Objective: Integrated Care Systems (ICSs) mark a change in the English National Health Service to more collaborative interorganisational working. We explored how effective the ICS form of collaboration is in achieving its goals by investigating how ICSs were developing, how system partners were balancing organisational and system responsibilities, how partners could be held to account and how local priorities were being reconciled with ICS priorities.Design: We carried out detailed case studies in three ICSs, each consisting of a system and its partners, using interviews, documentary analysis and meeting observations.Setting/participants: We conducted 64 in-depth, semistructured interviews with director-level representatives of ICS partners and observed eight meetings (three in case study 1, three in case study 2 and two in case study 3).Results: Collaborative working was welcomed by system members. The agreement of local governance arrangements was ongoing and challenging. System members found it difficult to balance system and individual responsibilities, with concerns that system priorities could run counter to organisational interests. Conflicts of interest were seen as inherent, but the benefits of collaborative decision-making were perceived to outweigh risks. There were multiple examples of work being carried out across systems and ‘places’ to share resources, change resource allocation and improve partnership working. Some interviewees reported reticence addressing difficult issues collaboratively, and that organisations’ statutory accountabilities were allowing a ‘retreat’ from the confrontation of difficult issues facing systems, such as agreeing action to achieve financial sustainability.Conclusions: There remain significant challenges regarding agreeing governance, accountability and decision-making arrangements which are particularly important due to the recent Health and Care Act 2022 which gave ICSs allocative functions for the majority of health resources for local populations. An arbiter who is independent of the ICS may be required to resolve disputes, along with increased support for shaping governance arrangements

Measuring quality in community nursing: A mixed methods study

AbstractBackgroundHigh-quality nursing care is crucial for patients with complex conditions and co-morbidities living at home, but such care is largely invisible to health planners and managers. Nursing care quality in acute settings is typically measured using a range of different quality measures; however, little is known about how service quality is measured in community nursing.ObjectiveTo establish which quality indicators are selected for community nursing; how these are selected and applied; and their usefulness to service users (patients and/or carers), commissioners and provider staff.DesignA mixed-methods study comprising three phases:1)A national survey of ‘Commissioning for Quality and Innovation’ indicators applied to community nursing care in 2014/2015. Data were analysed descriptively using SPSS 20.0.2)In-depth case study in five sites. Qualitative data were collected through observations, interviews, focus groups and documents. Thematic analysis was conducted using QSR NVivo 10.Findings from the first two phases were synthesised using a theoretical framework to examine how local and distal contexts affecting care provision impacted on selection and application of quality indicators for community nursing.3)Validity testing the findings and associated draft good practice guidance through a series of stakeholder engagement events held in venues across England.SettingThe national survey was conducted by telephone and e-mail. Each case study site comprised a Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and its associated provider of community nursing services.ParticipantsSurvey: 145 (68.7%) CCGs across England.Case study: NHS England national and regional quality leads (n=5); commissioners (n=19); provider managers (n=32); registered community nurses (n=45); adult patients (n=14) receiving care in their own homes and/or carers (n=7).FindingsA wide range of indicators was used nationally, with a major focus on organisational processes.Lack of nurse and service user involvement in indicator selection processes impacted negatively on their application and perceived usefulness. Indicator data collection was hampered by problematic IT software and connectivity and inter-organisational system incompatibility. Frontline staff considered indicators designed for acute settings inappropriate for use in community settings. Indicators did not reflect aspects of care such as time spent, kindness and respect, highly valued by frontline staff and service user participants.Workshop delegates (commissioners, provider managers, frontline staff and service users, n=242) endorsed the findings and draft good practice guidance.LimitationsOn-going service re-organisation during the study period affected access to participants in some sites. Limited available data precluded in-depth documentary analysis.ConclusionsCurrent quality indicators for community nursing are of limited use:Commissioners and provider managers should ensure that service users and frontline staff are involved in identifying and selecting indicators.Difficulties with connectivity and compatibility should be resolved before rolling new IT packages out into practice.Quality measures designed for acute settings should not be applied in community settings without modification.A mix of qualitative and quantitative methods should be used to determine service qualityFuture workResearch investigating appropriate modifications and associated costs of administering quality indicator schemes in integrated care settings.Funding detailsThe study was funded by the NIHR Health Service and Delivery Research programme

Using contractual incentives in district nursing in the English NHS: results from a qualitative study

© 2018 The author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Since 2008, health policy in England has been focusing increasingly on improving quality in healthcare services. To ensure quality improvements in community nursing, providers are required to meet several quality targets, including an incentive scheme known as Commissioning for Quality and Innovation (CQUIN). This paper reports on a study of how financial incentives are used in district nursing, an area of care which is particularly difficult to measure and monitor

How do they measure up? Differences in stakeholder perceptions of quality measures used in English community nursing

© The Author(s) 2019. Objectives: To establish how quality indicators used in English community nursing are selected and applied, and their perceived usefulness to service users, commissioners and service providers. Methods: A qualitative multi-site case study was conducted with five commissioning organizations and their service providers. Participants included commissioners, provider organization managers, nurses and service users. Results: Indicator selection and application often entail complex processes influenced by wider health system and cross-organizational factors. All participants felt that current indicators, while useful for accountability and management purposes, fail to reflect the true quality of community nursing care and may sometimes indirectly compromise care. Conclusions: Valuable resources may be better used for comprehensive system redesign, to ensure that patient, carer and nurse priorities are given equivalence with those of other stakeholders

The use of standard contracts in the English National Health Service: a case study analysis.

The use of contracts is vital to market transactions. The introduction of market reforms in health care in the U.K. and other developed countries twenty years ago meant greater use of contracts. In the U.K., health care contracting was widely researched in the 1990s. Yet, despite the changing policy context, the subject has attracted less interest in recent years. This paper seeks to fill a gap by reporting findings from a study of contracting in the English National Health Service (NHS) after the introduction of the national standard contract in 2007. By using economic and socio-legal theories and two case studies we examine the way in which the new contract was implemented in practice and the extent to which implementation conformed to policy intentions and to our theoretical predictions. Data were collected using non-participant observation of 36 contracting meetings, 24 semi-structured interviews, and analysis of documents. We found that despite efforts to introduce a more detailed ('complete') contract, in practice, purchasers and providers often reverted to a more relational style of contracting. Frequently reliance on the NHS hierarchy proved to be indispensable; in particular, formal dispute resolution was avoided and financial risk was re-allocated in compromises that sometimes ignored contractual provisions. Serious data deficiencies and shortages of skilled personnel still caused major difficulties. We conclude that contracting for health care continues to raise serious problems, which may be exacerbated by the impending transfer of responsibility to groups of general practitioners (GPs) who generally lack experience and expertise in large-scale, secondary care contracting