An example of when small NHS GP funding configurations create new problems, opportunities, players & demand - short read
Liam Cahill
I help NHS orgs embrace digital & innovate ? I help healthtech fit the NHS. National advisor. Social enterprise advocate, founder & non-exec. I write about #digitalhealth on LinkedIn.
Sometimes closely monitoring the arguably mundane activities of the NHS system can spark knock on effects which can spark opportunities. Here's one I've been mulling over this week - the contentious GP contract requirement to find a timely 'assessment of need' for patients.
Link - Pulse article here & Contract letter here
Whilst this will likely play out in the public arena as the GP community, BMA etc. take action, lets take a look at how this might play out more tangibly in the near term (assuming no U-turns).
General practice has no more physical capacity, and many have bought in additional virtual capacity through providers like LIVI. Whilst there is no extra money (it's a re-diversion of existing money they would get) this will likely be an obvious way of servicing this additional requirement. Logically I think LIVI's recent news of profitability may continue in that direction.
领英推荐
If GPs don't or can't fulfill the above then providing that they don't refer directly to 111 and the acute centers - it's possible that other Out Of Hours (OOH) or walk-in centres see more strain due to the the "find someone who can" responsibility of the providers. Again this may play to the outsourced providers providing more into new areas, or even see more commissioning by Integrated Care Systems looking to sate and support angry and overwhelmed local practices.
But what if in desperation and pushed by financial need the practices seek way to meet the rule but not the intended intention. Could we see suppliers who work more in the triage and asynchronous area provide more in depth asynch equivalents to 'assessments of need' when appointments can't be offered?
Sometimes in big systems, like the NHS, with different actors or stakeholders, relatively small changes to funding models and frameworks can create new unexpected and unanticipated problems to solve, forms of demand, new responses and change the kinds of organisations who are relevant or viable. By understanding and closely observing the system (instead of all the noise), we can see how thee important markets shift.
Whilst I don't know exactly what will play out, this is intended more on an illustrative case study, I have no doubt on two things - this will adjust the market for technology, and that it will increase the role of tech in the solution. Organisations who respond quickly will set new precedents, which will be tested and shared, and things get played out.
Idler and creative, amateur pickler (ball) Ai master, failed yoga student, previous NHS, digital entrepreneur, Trustee.
2 年I think there’s an interesting question to pose around triage. My insights are derived from mental health. Where we can see Ai solutions coming to market that can assist but still need time to prove themselves. But the system does appear stacked against them on several accounts 1. National models of delivery of primary mental health care is dominated by a one size model approach and is not open to reflective thinking 2. Mental health leaders and managers, very busy people, are often not in a position To influence decisions and lack exposure to cost benefit analysis 3. There’s either too much optimism or funds to waist so we have a plethora of mental health apps hitting the market that have no use case metrics or can even provide an elastic pitch to the NHS about what they can solve . When it comes to triage in GP , there has to be a mental health solution or one integrated with the physical, given that it makes one of the biggest demands on them. We have a number of such tools emerging so how do we shift them to primary care.