TY - JOUR
T1 - Primary or secondary care? What can economics contribute to evaluation at the interface?
AU - Scott, Anthony
N1 - Funding Information:
The author would like to thank John Cairns, Joanna Coast, Cam Donaldson, Stuart Watson and two anonymous referees for their helpful comments. HERU is supported by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Office Home and Health Department (SOHHD). The views expressed in this paper are those of the author, not SOHHD.
PY - 1996/3
Y1 - 1996/3
N2 - 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 GPs' 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 costeffectiveness, 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.
AB - 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 GPs' 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 costeffectiveness, 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.
KW - economic evaluation
KW - general practice
KW - primary care
KW - primary-secondary care interface
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029921107&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubmed.a024456
DO - 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubmed.a024456
M3 - Article
C2 - 8785070
AN - SCOPUS:0029921107
SN - 1741-3842
VL - 18
SP - 19
EP - 26
JO - Journal of Public Health
JF - Journal of Public Health
IS - 1
ER -