Megapractices: an update and tentative typology of the new models of primary care provision in Scotland
McAdam, H.; Hunter, B.; Blane, D.; Riddell, R.; Johnstone, C.; McCartney, G.
Show abstract
BackgroundGP practices in Scotland are changing with the emergence of megapractices. We aimed to update analyses of GP practice sizes in Scotland, and to begin the development of a typology of GP practices. MethodsFour methods were employed: 1. Analyses of routinely published data on GP practice sizes and listed GPs to identify and quantify megapractices; 2. Qualitative interviews; 3. Creation of commercial profiles; 4. Derivation of a GP practice typology. ResultsMost Scottish practices have less than 9,000 patients, but five megapractices with over 30,000 patients were identified. One had grown by over 18,000 patients in two years to almost 120,000 patients, with the next largest at almost 73,000 patients. Megapractices did not engage with interviews, but commercial profiling revealed an array of complex legal and financial arrangements for several of them. We suggest that the key parameters for describing practices should focus on: ownership, legal status and motives; the extent of service provision by doctors or Allied Health Professionals (AHPs); and practice list size. We tentatively propose four common practice types in Scotland: traditional practices, megapractices, social enterprise practices, and direct NHS provision, recognising substantial diversity amongst megapractices. ImplicationsPolicymakers should carefully consider the risks of the current drift in approach to GP provisioning. Evaluation of the impacts of new service models on healthcare access, health outcomes and inequalities is urgently needed.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Implementation of predictive risk stratification to reduce emergency admissions to hospital: experiences of general practitioners and practice managers 96%
- Primary care transformation in Scotland: a comparison two cross-sectional national surveys of general practitioners’ views in 2018 and 2023 95%
- OpenSAFELY NHS Service Restoration Observatory 1: describing trends and variation in primary care clinical activity for 23.3 million patients in England during the first wave of COVID-19 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Primary care use of laboratory tests in Northern Ireland Western Health and Social Care Trust: a cross-sectional study 94%
- How and why do Quality Circles work for General Practitioners - a realist approach 94%
- What is the suitability of clinical vignettes in benchmarking the performance of online symptom checkers? An audit study 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Understanding the influence of leadership, organisation, and policy on delivering an integrated child health and social care service in community settings: A qualitative exploration using the SELFIE framework 93%
- Drug company methodologies used for reporting in the UK pharmaceutical industry payment transparency database between 2015-2019: A content analysis 91%
- Staff experiences and perspectives of delivering an integrated child health and social care service in community settings: A qualitative exploration using the SELFIE framework 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Wading through Molasses: A qualitative examination of the experiences, perceptions, attitudes, and knowledge of Australian medical practitioners regarding medical billing 95%
- COVI-Prim survey: Challenges for Austrian and German general practitioners during initial phase of COVID-19 93%
- UK osteopathic practice in 2019: a retrospective analysis of practice data 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.