NHS rationing must be based on spending rules, not treatment blacklists

NHS rationing must be rooted in rules on how public money is spent, rather than explicit lists of services the NHS must or must not provide, a health think tank has argued.

The Nuffield Trust looked at the feasibility and desirability of introducing an explicit, national package of care for the NHS in England.

The trust concluded that developing a detailed national package of NHS services was ‘likely to be unworkable, and implementing it may lead to adverse consequences’. Any list of NHS services would be technically challenging to develop and enforce, limit local autonomy and be vulnerable to national political pressure, it said.

The Nuffield Trust said the NHS should instead establish a set of principles to ‘shape how public money is spent in the NHS and, conversely, inform decisions about what will no longer be paid for’.

In addition, the NHS Commissioning Board should use NICE guidance as the basis for a list of the treatments that public money should not be spent on in the NHS, the trust said.

Commissioners should also be benchmarked for how effectively they follow guidance on cost-effective commissioning, it argued.

Dr Judith Smith, head of policy at the Nuffield Trust, said the NHS reforms were entering a new era ‘which could result in more variation in the care that is provided to patients’.

‘The current system for defining what is in and out of the NHS 'offer' is far from ideal,' she said. 'Many people believe it is opaque and that your postcode can determine whether or not you get access to certain treatments.

‘The NHS Commissioning Board should work closely with clinical commissioning groups to ensure they are not deviating from national guidelines about what to fund and what not to fund, unless there are good reasons for doing so, and that any decisions made locally are subject to proper public scrutiny,' she said.

‘A failure to get this right could lead to greater calls for defining at a national level what is funded on the NHS and what is excluded, which we believe would have significant drawbacks in terms of limiting the autonomy of local clinicians to make decisions based on what is best for their communities.’

Have you registered with us yet?

Register now to enjoy more articles and free email bulletins

Register

Already registered?

Sign in

Follow Us:

Just published

Viewpoint: 'Why the RCGP should not adopt a neutral stance on assisted dying'

Viewpoint: 'Why the RCGP should not adopt a neutral stance on assisted dying'

The RCGP is currently surveying members for their views on assisted dying. In response...

Hurried GP consultations 'a scandal', RCGP chair warns

Hurried GP consultations 'a scandal', RCGP chair warns

Hurried consultations in general practice are 'a scandal that needs to be named'...

GMC labels overseas GP registration 'unfit for purpose' as British doctor denied work

GMC labels overseas GP registration 'unfit for purpose' as British doctor denied work

The GMC has labelled the system for registering overseas doctors as 'unfit for purpose'...

Which parts of England are facing a GP retirement timebomb?

Which parts of England are facing a GP retirement timebomb?

In parts of England more than 40% of the GP workforce in permanent roles is aged...

GPs need rapid access to cancer tests to speed up diagnosis, says RCGP

GPs need rapid access to cancer tests to speed up diagnosis, says RCGP

GPs need better access to cancer tests, the RCGP has warned, after research showed...

GP training: How to get the most from the trainee e-portfolio

GP training: How to get the most from the trainee e-portfolio

Dr Patrice Baptiste provides advice on what GP trainees need to include in their...