Literature DB >> 11407049

Rationale for the new GP deprivation payment scheme in England: effects of moving from electoral ward to enumeration district underprivileged area scores.

M Bajekal1, B Alves, B Jarman, B Hurwitz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Department of Health introduced a new deprivation payments system for general practitioners (GPs) on 1 April 1999. Following a three-year phasing-in process, registered patients will attract deprivation payments based on the underprivileged area (UPA) score of their enumeration district (ED) of residence, rather than their electoral ward, changing the pattern and distribution of payments throughout England. AIM: To assess the rationale behind the changed deprivation payments system for GPs in England and to examine its impact on GP and practice payments. DESIGN OF STUDY: A quantitative study modelling practice-based deprivation payments.
SETTING: A total of 25,450 unrestricted principal GPs in 8919 practices in England.
METHOD: The effect of three new components in the system were examined: changes in the ED score ranges attracting payment, the percentage increase in the size of successive payment bands, and the total budget. The relationship between consultation rates (used as a proxy for workload) and UPA score was examined, together with changes in GP payments calculated nationally and by geographical area.
RESULTS: A total of 11.6% of the population of England live in wards with a UPA score of 30 or more, qualifying for deprivation payments, and a similar proportion (11.4%) live in EDs with a UPA score of 20 or more. The larger percentage increases in the size of payments in successive ED UPA bands is supported by the modelled relationship between consultation rate and UPA score. Financially, under the new deprivations payment system, entitlement widens with 88% of practices receiving a payment. Overall, 74% of GPs gain and 13% lose (3% losing more than 1500 Pounds), with 13% receiving no payment.
CONCLUSION: The new ED system maps onto the previous system well. Moreover, it more finely discriminates between smaller areas of different relative deprivation and, thereby, targets payments more accurately.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11407049      PMCID: PMC1314025     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  14 in total

1.  Designing a deprivation payment for general practitioners: the UPA(8) wonderland.

Authors:  R A Carr-Hill; T Sheldon
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-02-16

2.  Deprivation payments revisited (again)

Authors:  R Hobbs; T Cole
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-09-14

3.  The quality divide in primary care.

Authors:  M Pringle
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-08-19

4.  Does the underprivileged area index work?

Authors:  R Leavey; J Wood
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1985-09-14

5.  Analysis from inner London of deprivation payments based on enumeration districts rather than wards.

Authors:  T Crayford; J Shanks; M Bajekal; S Langford
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-09-23

6.  Deprivation payments should be based on enumeration districts.

Authors:  A Hastings
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-01-20

7.  Deprivation payments fairer in Scotland.

Authors:  C W Brown
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1993-06-05

8.  Identification of underprivileged areas.

Authors:  B Jarman
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1983-05-28

9.  Underprivileged areas: validation and distribution of scores.

Authors:  B Jarman
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1984-12-08

10.  Prediction of general practice workload from census based social deprivation scores.

Authors:  Y Ben-Shlomo; I White; P M McKeigue
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 3.710

View more
  2 in total

1.  So much to do, so little time: care for the socially disadvantaged and the 15-minute visit.

Authors:  Kevin Fiscella; Ronald M Epstein
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2008-09-22

2.  Care Need Index, a useful tool for the distribution of primary health care resources.

Authors:  K Sundquist; M Malmström; S-E Johansson; J Sundquist
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 3.710

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.