Literature DB >> 8785070

Primary or secondary care? What can economics contribute to evaluation at the interface?

A Scott1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The substitution of primary for secondary care is progressing at a fast pace, yet there has been little evaluation of the appropriateness of such a fundamental change in health service organization. The aim of this paper is to raise some issues for discussion about the contribution of economics to future research on the substitution of primary for secondary care. Given the central role general practitioners (GPs) will play in a "primary care led' National Health Service, the paper concentrates on the replacement of secondary care by GP-based services.
METHODS: The existing empirical evidence relevant to the replacement of secondary care by GP-based services is summarized. From this, issues for further research from an economic perspective are identified and discussed.
RESULTS: The evidence comprises studies examining the efficiency or cost-effectiveness of substituting GP-based care for secondary care and studies examining the effects of incentives on the mixture and range of services provided. Cost-effectiveness evidence is scarce and inconclusive. The evidence on incentives suggests that new services are being provided in local areas which need them least. Several avenues of further research are suggested. As well as more economic evaluation, future research should concentrate on developing methods to elicit patients' and communities' preferences for GP-based care versus secondary care. Research into incentives should concentrate on assessing those factors, beyond practice characteristics, that influence GP's decisions about whether to provide services and how much to provide. This would help to design more appropriate incentives for GPs.
CONCLUSIONS: The appropriate balance between primary and secondary care is unknown. The transfer of services from secondary care to general practice (and other primary care providers) should be based on empirical evidence on cost-effectiveness, as should the incentives given to GPs. Although the research agenda is challenging, it is necessary in ensuring that a "primary care led' health system is the right way forward for the NHS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8785070     DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubmed.a024456

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Public Health Med        ISSN: 0957-4832


  6 in total

1.  Measuring progress towards a primary care-led NHS.

Authors:  P Miller; N Craig; A Scott; A Walker; P Hanlon
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Developing intermediate care provided by general practitioners with a special interest: the economic perspective.

Authors:  David P Kernick
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 3.  Gastroenterology services in the UK. The burden of disease, and the organisation and delivery of services for gastrointestinal and liver disorders: a review of the evidence.

Authors:  J G Williams; S E Roberts; M F Ali; W Y Cheung; D R Cohen; G Demery; A Edwards; M Greer; M D Hellier; H A Hutchings; B Ip; M F Longo; I T Russell; H A Snooks; J C Williams
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 4.  Increased general practice workload due to a primary care led National Health Service: the need for evidence to support rhetoric.

Authors:  A Scott; L Vale
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Economic Aspects of Delivering Primary Care Services: An Evidence Synthesis to Inform Policy and Research Priorities.

Authors:  Lorcan Clarke; Michael Anderson; Rob Anderson; Morten Bonde Klausen; Rebecca Forman; Jenna Kerns; Adrian Rabe; Søren Rud Kristensen; Pavlos Theodorakis; Jose Valderas; Hans Kluge; Elias Mossialos
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2021-09-02       Impact factor: 4.911

6.  Organisation of services for people with cardiovascular disorders in primary care: transfer to primary care or to specialist-generalist multidisciplinary teams?

Authors:  Egle Price; Richard Baker; Jane Krause; Christine Keen
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2014-09-22       Impact factor: 2.497

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.