Are local public expenditure reductions associated with increases in inequality in emergency hospitalisation? Time-series analysis of English local authorities from 2010 to 2017.

BACKGROUND: Reductions in local government funding implemented in 2010 due to austerity policies have been associated with worsening socioeconomic inequalities in mortality. Less is known about the relationship of these reductions with healthcare inequalities; therefore, we investigated whether areas with greater reductions in local government funding had greater increases in socioeconomic inequalities in emergency admissions. METHODS: We examined inequalities between English local authority districts (LADs) using a fixed-effects linear regression to estimate the association between LAD expenditure reductions, their level of deprivation using the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) and average rates of (all and avoidable) emergency admissions for the years 2010-2017. We also examined changes in inequalities in emergency admissions using the Absolute Gradient Index (AGI), which is the modelled gap between the most and least deprived neighbourhoods in an area. RESULTS: LADs within the most deprived IMD quintile had larger pounds per capita expenditure reductions, higher rates of all and avoidable emergency admissions, and greater between-neighbourhood inequalities in admissions. However, expenditure reductions were only associated with increasing average rates of all and avoidable emergency admissions and inequalities between neighbourhoods in local authorities in England's three least deprived IMD quintiles. For a LAD in the least deprived IMD quintile, a yearly reduction of £100 per capita in total expenditure was associated with a yearly increase of 47 (95% CI 22 to 73) avoidable admissions, 142 (95% CI 70 to 213) all-cause emergency admissions and a yearly increase in inequalities between neighbourhoods of 48 (95% CI 14 to 81) avoidable and 140 (95% CI 60 to 220) all-cause emergency admissions. In 2017, a LAD average population was ~170 000. CONCLUSION: Austerity policies implemented in 2010 impacted less deprived local authorities, where emergency admissions and inequalities between neighbourhoods increased, while in the most deprived areas, emergency admissions were unchanged, remaining high and persistent.

Decomposition of Quality-Adjusted Life Expectancy Inequalities by Mortality and Health-Related Quality of Life Dimensions.

BACKGROUND: Quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) combines mortality risk and multidimensional health-related quality of life (HRQoL) information to measure healthy life expectancy in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). This paper estimates the relative importance of individual quality of life dimensions in explaining inequalities in QALE. METHODS: We combined EQ-5D-5L data from the Health Survey for England for 2017 and 2018 (N = 14,412) with full population mortality data from the Office for National Statistics to calculate QALE by age, sex and deprivation quintile. The effect of HRQoL dimensions on the socioeconomic gradient in QALE was decomposed using an iterative imputation approach, in which inequalities associated with socioeconomic status in each domain were removed by imputing the response distribution of the richest quintile for all participants. Sampling uncertainty in the HRQoL data was evaluated using bootstrapping. RESULTS: People in the least deprived fifth of neighbourhoods in England can expect to live 7.0 years longer and experience 11.1 more QALYs than those in the most deprived fifth. Inequalities in HRQoL accounted for 28.0% and 45.7% of QALE inequalities for males and females, respectively. Pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression and mobility were the most influential HRQoL domains. DISCUSSION: Our results identify the extent of inequalities associated with socioeconomic status in lifetime health and the relative importance of inequalities by mortality and HRQoL. The contributions of the individual dimensions of HRQoL towards lifetime inequalities vary substantially by sex. Our findings can help to identify the types of interventions most likely to alleviate health inequalities, which may be different for males and females.

Impact of prevention in primary care on costs in primary and secondary care for people with serious mental illness.

A largely unexplored part of the financial incentive for physicians to participate in preventive care is the degree to which they are the residual claimant from any resulting cost savings. We examine the impact of two preventive activities for people with serious mental illness (care plans and annual reviews of physical health) by English primary care practices on costs in these practices and in secondary care. Using panel two-part models to analyze patient-level data linked across primary and secondary care, we find that these preventive activities in the previous year are associated with cost reductions in the current quarter both in primary and secondary care. We estimate that there are large beneficial externalities for which the primary care physician is not the residual claimant: the cost savings in secondary care are 4.7 times larger than the cost savings in primary care. These activities are incentivized in the English National Health Service but the total financial incentives for primary care physicians to participate were considerably smaller than the total cost savings produced. This suggests that changes to the design of incentives to increase the marginal reward for conducting these preventive activities among patients with serious mental illness could have further increased welfare.

Quality-Adjusted Life Expectancy Norms for the English Population.

OBJECTIVES: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in England has implemented severity-of-disease modifiers that give greater weight to health benefits accruing to patients who experience a larger shortfall in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) under current standard of care than healthy individuals. This requires an estimate of quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) of the general population based on age and sex. Previous QALE population norms are based on nearly 30-year-old assessments of health-related quality of life in the general population. This study provides updated QALE estimates for the English population based on age and sex. METHODS: 5-level version of EQ-5D data for 14 412 participants from the Health Survey for England (waves 2017 and 2018) were pooled, and health-related quality of life population norms were calculated. These norms were combined with official life tables from the Office for National Statistics for 2017 to 2019 using the Sullivan method to derive QALE estimates based on age and sex. Values were discounted using 0%, 1.5%, and 3.5% discount rates. RESULTS: QALE at birth is 68.24 QALYs for men and 68.21 QALYs for women. These values are significantly lower than previously published QALE population norms based on the older 3-level version of EQ-5D data. CONCLUSION: This study provides new QALE population norms for England that serve to establish absolute and relative QALY shortfalls for the purpose of health technology assessments.

Socioeconomic inequalities in HRQoL in England: an age-sex stratified analysis.

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic status is a key predictor of lifetime health: poorer people can expect to live shorter lives with lower average health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) than richer people. In this study, we aimed to improve understanding of the socioeconomic gradient in HRQoL by exploring how inequalities in different dimensions of HRQoL differ by age. METHODS: Data were derived from the Health Survey for England for 2017 and 2018 (14,412 participants). HRQoL was measured using the EQ-5D-5L instrument. We estimated mean EQ-5D utility scores and reported problems on five HRQoL dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) for ages 16 to 90+ and stratified by neighbourhood deprivation quintiles. Relative and absolute measures of inequality were assessed. RESULTS: Mean EQ-5D utility scores declined with age and followed a socioeconomic gradient, with the lowest scores in the most deprived areas. Gaps between the most and least deprived quintiles emerged around the age of 35, reached their greatest extent at age 60 to 64 (relative HRQoL of most deprived compared to least deprived quintile: females = 0.77 (95% CI: 0.68-0.85); males = 0.78 (95% CI: 0.69-0.87)) before closing again in older age groups. Gaps were apparent for all five EQ-5D dimensions but were greatest for mobility and self-care. CONCLUSION: There are stark socioeconomic inequalities in all dimensions of HRQoL in England. These inequalities start to develop from early adulthood and increase with age but reduce again around retirement age.

Excess years of life lost to COVID-19 and other causes of death by sex, neighbourhood deprivation, and region in England and Wales during 2020: A registry-based study.

BACKGROUND: Deaths in the first year of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in England and Wales were unevenly distributed socioeconomically and geographically. However, the full scale of inequalities may have been underestimated to date, as most measures of excess mortality do not adequately account for varying age profiles of deaths between social groups. We measured years of life lost (YLL) attributable to the pandemic, directly or indirectly, comparing mortality across geographic and socioeconomic groups. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used national mortality registers in England and Wales, from 27 December 2014 until 25 December 2020, covering 3,265,937 deaths. YLLs (main outcome) were calculated using 2019 single year sex-specific life tables for England and Wales. Interrupted time-series analyses, with panel time-series models, were used to estimate expected YLL by sex, geographical region, and deprivation quintile between 7 March 2020 and 25 December 2020 by cause: direct deaths (COVID-19 and other respiratory diseases), cardiovascular disease and diabetes, cancer, and other indirect deaths (all other causes). Excess YLL during the pandemic period were calculated by subtracting observed from expected values. Additional analyses focused on excess deaths for region and deprivation strata, by age-group. Between 7 March 2020 and 25 December 2020, there were an estimated 763,550 (95% CI: 696,826 to 830,273) excess YLL in England and Wales, equivalent to a 15% (95% CI: 14 to 16) increase in YLL compared to the equivalent time period in 2019. There was a strong deprivation gradient in all-cause excess YLL, with rates per 100,000 population ranging from 916 (95% CI: 820 to 1,012) for the least deprived quintile to 1,645 (95% CI: 1,472 to 1,819) for the most deprived. The differences in excess YLL between deprivation quintiles were greatest in younger age groups; for all-cause deaths, a mean of 9.1 years per death (95% CI: 8.2 to 10.0) were lost in the least deprived quintile, compared to 10.8 (95% CI: 10.0 to 11.6) in the most deprived; for COVID-19 and other respiratory deaths, a mean of 8.9 years per death (95% CI: 8.7 to 9.1) were lost in the least deprived quintile, compared to 11.2 (95% CI: 11.0 to 11.5) in the most deprived. For all-cause mortality, estimated deaths in the most deprived compared to the most affluent areas were much higher in younger age groups, but similar for those aged 85 or over. There was marked variability in both all-cause and direct excess YLL by region, with the highest rates in the North West. Limitations include the quasi-experimental nature of the research design and the requirement for accurate and timely recording. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed strong socioeconomic and geographical health inequalities in YLL, during the first calendar year of the COVID-19 pandemic. These were in line with long-standing existing inequalities in England and Wales, with the most deprived areas reporting the largest numbers in potential YLL.

Healthcare resource use and costs for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus with and without severe mental illness in England: longitudinal matched-cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 60 000 people in England have coexisting type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and severe mental illness (SMI). They are more likely to have poorer health outcomes and require more complex care pathways compared with those with T2DM alone. Despite increasing prevalence, little is known about the healthcare resource use and costs for people with both conditions. AIMS: To assess the impact of SMI on healthcare resource use and service costs for adults with T2DM, and explore the predictors of healthcare costs and lifetime costs for people with both conditions. METHOD: This was a matched-cohort study using data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episode Statistics for 1620 people with comorbid SMI and T2DM and 4763 people with T2DM alone. Generalised linear models and the Bang and Tsiatis method were used to explore cost predictors and mean lifetime costs respectively. RESULTS: There were higher average annual costs for people with T2DM and SMI (£1930 higher) than people with T2DM alone, driven primarily by mental health and non-mental health-related hospital admissions. Key predictors of higher total costs were older age, comorbid hypertension, use of antidepressants, use of first-generation antipsychotics, and increased duration of living with both conditions. Expected lifetime costs were approximately £35 000 per person with both SMI and T2DM. Extrapolating nationally, this would generate total annual costs to the National Health Service of around £250 m per year. CONCLUSIONS: Our estimates of resource use and costs for people with both T2DM and SMI will aid policymakers and commissioners in service planning and resource allocation.

Reducing inequality in avoidable emergency admissions: Case studies of local health care systems in England using a realist approach.

OBJECTIVE: People in disadvantaged areas are more likely to have an avoidable emergency hospital admission. Socio-economic inequality in avoidable emergency hospital admissions is monitored in England. Our aim was to inform local health care purchasing and planning by identifying recent health care system changes (or other factors), as reported by local health system leaders, that might explain narrowing or widening trends. METHODS: Case studies were undertaken in one pilot and at five geographically distinct local health care systems (Clinical Commissioning Groups, CCGs), identified as having consistently increasing or decreasing inequality. Local settings were explored through discussions with CCG officials and stakeholders to identify potential local determinants. Data were analysed using a realist evaluation approach to generate context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations. RESULTS: Of the five geographically distinct CCGs, two had narrowing inequality, two widening, and one narrowing inequality, which widened during the project. None of the CCGs had designed a large-scale package of service changes with the explicit aim of reducing socio-economic inequality in avoidable emergency admissions, and local decision makers were unfamiliar with their own trends. Potential primary and community care determinants included: workforce, case finding and exclusion, proactive care co-ordination for patients with complex needs, and access and quality. Potential commissioning determinants included: data use and incentives, and targeting of services. Other potential determinants included changes in care home services, national A&E targets, and wider issues - such as public services financial constraints, residential gentrification, and health care expectations. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any bespoke initiatives that explained the inequality trends. The trends were more likely due to an interplay of multiple health care and wider system factors. Local decision makers need greater awareness, understanding and support to interpret, use and act upon inequality indicators. They are unlikely to find simple, cheap interventions to reduce inequalities in avoidable emergency admissions. Rather, long-term multifaceted interventions are required that embed inequality considerations into mainstream decision making.

Health inequality in Britain before 1750.

BACKGROUND: This study examines the claim that social inequality in health in European populations was absent prior to 1750. This claim is primarily based on comparisons of life expectancy at birth in England between general and ducal (elite aristocrat) social classes from the 1550s to the 1870s. METHODS: We examined historic childhood mortality trends among the English ducal class and the general population, based on previously published data. We compared mid-childhood to adolescent mortality (age 5-14) and early-childhood mortality (age 0-4) between the ducal class and the general population from the 17th to 19th centuries. RESULTS: Prior to 1750, ducal early-childhood mortality was higher than the general population. However, mid-childhood to adolescent mortality was lower among the ducal class than the general population in all observed periods for boys, and almost all periods for girls. Among the ducal class, but not the general population, there was a sharp decline in early-childhood mortality around the 1750s which may partly explain the divergent trends in overall life expectancy at birth. CONCLUSION: Health inequality between the ducal class and general population was present in England from the 16th to mid-18th centuries, with disadvantages in mortality for ducal children in infancy and early childhood, but survival advantages in mid-childhood and adolescence. These opposing effects are obscured in life expectancy at birth data. Relatively high early-childhood mortality among ducal families before 1750 likely resulted from short birth intervals and harmful infant feeding practices during this time.

Estimating the equity impacts of the smoking ban in England on cotinine levels: a regression discontinuity design.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the equity impacts of the 2007 smoking ban in England, for both smokers and non-smokers. DESIGN: Doubly robust regression discontinuity analysis of salivary cotinine levels. Conditional average treatment effects were used to estimate differential impacts of the ban by socioeconomic deprivation (based on the Index of Multiple Deprivation). Distributional impacts were further assessed using conditional quantile treatment effects and inequality treatment effects. SETTING: In 2007, England introduced a ban on smoking in public places. This had little impact on tobacco consumption by smokers but was associated with decreases in environmental tobacco smoke exposure for non-smokers. However, the impact of the ban on socioeconomic inequalities in exposure is unclear. PARTICIPANTS: 766 smokers and 2952 non-smokers responding to the Health Survey for England in 2007. OUTCOME MEASURE: Levels of salivary cotinine. RESULTS: Before the ban, socioeconomic deprivation was associated with higher cotinine levels for non-smokers but not for smokers. The ban caused a significant reduction in average cotinine levels for non-smokers (p=0.043) but had no effect for smokers (p=0.817). Reductions for non-smokers were greater for more deprived groups with higher levels of exposure, and there was a significant reduction in socioeconomic-related inequality in cotinine. Across the whole population (both smokers and non-smokers), there was no significant increase in the concentration of cotinine levels among the socioeconomically deprived. CONCLUSION: The 2007 ban on smoking in public places had little impact on smokers, but was, as intended, associated with reductions in both (1) average levels of environmental tobacco smoke exposure and (2) deprivation-related inequality in exposure among non-smokers.

Equity-informative methods of health services research.

PURPOSE: We review quantitative methods for analysing the equity impacts of health care and public health interventions: who benefits most and who bears the largest burdens (opportunity costs)? Mainstream health services research focuses on effectiveness and efficiency but decision makers also need information about equity. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: We review equity-informative methods of quantitative data analysis in three core areas of health services research: effectiveness analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis and performance measurement. An appendix includes further readings and resources. FINDINGS: Researchers seeking to analyse health equity impacts now have a practical and flexible set of methods at their disposal which builds on the standard health services research toolkit. Some of the more advanced methods require specialised skills, but basic equity-informative methods can be used by any health services researcher with appropriate skills in the three core areas. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: We hope that this review will raise awareness of equity-informative methods of health services research and facilitate their entry into the mainstream so that health policymakers are routinely presented with information about who gains and who loses from their decisions.

The inverse care law re-examined: a global perspective.

An inverse care law persists in almost all low-income and middle-income countries, whereby socially disadvantaged people receive less, and lower-quality, health care despite having greater need. By contrast, a disproportionate care law persists in high-income countries, whereby socially disadvantaged people receive more health care, but of worse quality and insufficient quantity to meet their additional needs. Both laws are caused not only by financial barriers and fragmented health insurance systems but also by social inequalities in care seeking and co-investment as well as the costs and benefits of health care. Investing in more integrated universal health coverage and stronger primary care, delivered in proportion to need, can improve population health and reduce health inequality. However, trade-offs sometimes exist between health policy objectives. Health-care technologies, policies, and resourcing should be subjected to distributional analysis of their equity impacts, to ensure the objective of reducing health inequalities is kept in sight.

Impact of a national primary care pay-for-performance scheme on ambulatory care sensitive hospital admissions: a small-area analysis in England.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to spatially describe hospital admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSC) in England at small-area geographical level and assess whether recorded practice performance under one of the world's largest primary care pay-for-performance schemes led to reductions in these potentially avoidable hospitalisations for chronic conditions incentivised in the scheme. SETTING: We obtained numbers of ACSC hospital admissions from the Hospital Episode Statistics database and information on recorded practice performance from the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) administrative dataset for 2015/2016. We fitted three sets of negative binomial models to examine ecological associations between incentivised ACSC admissions, general practice performance, deprivation, urbanity and other sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: Hospital admissions for QOF incentivised ACSCs varied within and between regions, with clusters of high numbers of hospital admissions for incentivised ACSCs identified across England. Our models indicated a very small effect of the QOF on reducing admissions for incentivised ACSCs (0.993, 95% CI 0.990 to 0.995), however, other factors, such as deprivation (1.021, 95% CI 1.020 to 1.021) and urbanicity (0.875, 95% CI 0.862 to 0.887), were far more important in explaining variations in admissions for ACSCs. People in deprived areas had a higher risk of being admitted in hospital for an incentivised ACSC condition. CONCLUSION: Spatial analysis based on routinely collected data can be used to identify areas with high rates of potentially avoidable hospital admissions, providing valuable information for targeting resources and evaluating public health interventions. Our findings suggest that the QOF had a very small effect on reducing avoidable hospitalisation for incentivised conditions. Material deprivation and urbanicity were the strongest predictors of the variation in ACSC rates for all QOF incentivised conditions across England.

The impact of frailty on healthcare resource use: a longitudinal analysis using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink in England.

BACKGROUND: routine frailty identification and management is national policy in England, but there remains a lack of evidence on the impact of frailty on healthcare resource use. We evaluated the impact of frailty on the use and costs of general practice and hospital care. METHODS: retrospective longitudinal analysis using linked routine primary care records for 95,863 patients aged 65-95 years registered with 125 UK general practices between 2003 and 2014. Baseline frailty was measured using the electronic Frailty Index (eFI) and classified in four categories (non, mild, moderate, severe). Negative binomial regressions and ordinary least squares regressions with multilevel mixed effects were applied on the use and costs of general practice and hospital care. RESULTS: compared with non-frail status, annual general practitioner consultation incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were 1.24 (95% CI: 1.21-1.27) for mild, 1.41 (95% CI: 1.35-1.47) for moderate, and 1.52 (95% CI: 1.42-1.62) for severe frailty. For emergency hospital admissions, the respective IRRs were 1.64 (95% CI 1.60-1.68), 2.45 (95% CI 2.37-2.53) and 3.16 (95% CI: 3.00-3.33). Compared with non-frail people the IRR for inpatient days was 7.26 (95% CI 6.61-7.97) for severe frailty. Using 2013/14 reference costs, extra annual cost to the healthcare system per person was £561.05 for mild, £1,208.60 for moderate and £2,108.20 for severe frailty. This equates to a total additional cost of £5.8 billion per year across the UK. CONCLUSIONS: increasing frailty is associated with substantial increases in healthcare costs, driven by increased hospital admissions, longer inpatient stay, and increased general practice consultations.

Making and breaking a health service.

The creation of the National Health Service (NHS) marked a radical break with the past, making health care universally available on the basis of need rather than means. The NHS was conceived during wartime emergency and has had to survive further regular crises to reach its 70th year, but it now faces challenges that are unprecedented in scale and there are doubts about its ability to continue in its present form. Resources have not increased with need, and the NHS can no longer function as a comprehensive service during periods of peak demand. Policymakers look for solutions in service rearrangements, new technologies, quality improvement initiatives and alternative funding arrangements; meanwhile, chronic lack of capacity is taking a predictable toll on patient care and staff morale. The NHS has become a formidably resilient institution, but securing its future may take as great a collective effort as the one that created it.

Disparities in mortality among 25-44-year-olds in England: a longitudinal, population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Since the mid-1990s, excess mortality has increased markedly for adults aged 25-44 years in the north compared with the south of England. We examined the underlying causes of this excess mortality and the contribution of socioeconomic deprivation. METHODS: Mortality data from the Office of National Statistics for adults aged 25-44 years were aggregated and compared between England's five most northern versus five most southern government office regions between Jan 1, 1981, and Dec 31, 2016. Poisson regression models, adjusted for age and sex, were used to quantify excess mortality in the north compared with the south by underlying cause of death (accidents, alcohol related, cardiovascular disease and diabetes, drug related, suicide, cancer, and other causes). The role of socioeconomic deprivation, as measured by the 2015 Index of Multiple Deprivation, in explaining the excess and regional variability was also explored. FINDINGS: A mortality divide between the north and south appeared in the mid-1990s and rapidly expanded thereafter for deaths attributed to accidents, alcohol misuse, and drug misuse. In the 2014-16 period, the northern excess was incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1·47 (95% CI 1·39-1·54) for cardiovascular reasons, 2·09 (1·94-2·25) for alcohol misuse, and 1·60 (1·51-1·70) for drug misuse, across both men and women aged 25-44 years. National mortality rates for cardiovascular deaths declined over the study period but a longstanding gap between north and south persisted (from 33·3 [95% CI 31·8-34·8] in 1981 to 15·0 [14·0-15·9] in 2016 in the north vs from 23·5 [22·3-24·8] to 9·9 [9·2-10·5] in the south). Between 2014 and 2016, estimated excess numbers of death in the north versus the south for those aged 25-44 years were 1881 (95% CI 726-2627) for women and 3530 (2216-4511) for men. Socioeconomic deprivation explained up to two-thirds of the excess mortality in the north (IRR for northern effect reduced from 1·15 [95% CI 1·14-1·15; unadjusted] to 1·05 [1·04-1·05; adjusted for Index of Multiple Deprivation]). By 2016, in addition to the persistent north-south gap, mortality rates in London were lower than in all other regions, with IRRs ranging from IRR 1·13 (95% CI 1·12-1·15) for the East England to 1·22 (1·20-1·24) for the North East, even after adjusting for deprivation. INTERPRETATION: Sharp relative rises in deaths from cardiovascular reasons, alcohol misuse and drug misuse in the north compared with the south seem to have created new health divisions between England's regions. This gap might be due to exacerbation of existing social and health inequalities that have been experienced for many years. These divisions might suggest increasing psychological distress, despair, and risk taking among young and middle-aged adults, particularly outside of London. FUNDING: Medical Research Council and Wellcome Trust.

General practitioners and emergency departments (GPED)-efficient models of care: a mixed-methods study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Pressure continues to grow on emergency departments in the UK and throughout the world, with declining performance and adverse effects on patient outcome, safety and experience. One proposed solution is to locate general practitioners to work in or alongside the emergency department (GPED). Several GPED models have been introduced, however, evidence of effectiveness is weak. This study aims to evaluate the impact of GPED on patient care, the primary care and acute hospital team and the wider urgent care system. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study will be divided into three work packages (WPs). WP-A; Mapping and Taxonomy: mapping, description and classification of current models of GPED in all emergency departments in England and interviews with key informants to examine the hypotheses that underpin GPED. WP-B; Quantitative Analysis of National Data: measurement of the effectiveness, costs and consequences of the GPED models identified in WP-A, compared with a no-GPED model, using retrospective analysis of Hospital Episode Statistics Data. WP-C; Case Studies: detailed case studies of different GPED models using a mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods including: non-participant observation of clinical care, semistructured interviews with staff, patients and carers; workforce surveys with emergency department staff and analysis of available local routinely collected hospital data. Prospective case study sites will be identified by completing telephone interviews with sites awarded capital funding by the UK government to implement GPED initiatives. The study has a strong patient and public involvement group that has contributed to study design and materials, and which will be closely involved in data interpretation and dissemination. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the National Health Service East Midlands-Leicester South Research Ethics Committee: 17/EM/0312. The results of the study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conferences and a planned programme of knowledge mobilisation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN51780222.

Modelling the cost-effectiveness of pay-for-performance in primary care in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Introduced in 2004, the United Kingdom's (UK) Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) is the world's largest primary-care pay-for-performance programme. Given some evidence of the benefits and the substantial costs associated with the QOF, it remains unclear whether the programme is cost-effective. Therefore, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of continuing versus stopping the QOF. METHODS: We developed a lifetime simulation model to estimate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs for a UK population cohort aged 40-74 years (n = 27,070,862) exposed to the QOF and for a counterfactual scenario without exposure. Based on a previous retrospective cross-country analysis using data from 1994 to 2010, we assumed the benefits of the QOF to be a change in age-adjusted mortality of -3.68 per 100,000 population (95% confidence interval -8.16 to 0.80). We used cost-effectiveness thresholds of £30,000/QALY, £20,000/QALY and £13,000/QALY to determine the optimal strategy in base-case and sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, continuing the QOF increased population-level QALYs and health-care costs yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £49,362/QALY. The ICER remained >£30,000/QALY in scenarios with and without non-fatal outcomes or increased drug costs, and under differing assumptions about the duration of QOF benefit following its hypothetical discontinuation. The ICER for continuing the programme fell below £30,000/QALY when QOF incentive payments were 36% lower (while preserving QOF mortality benefits), and in scenarios where the QOF resulted in substantial reductions in health-care spending or non-fatal cardiovascular disease events. Continuing the QOF was cost-effective in 18%, 3% and 0% of probabilistic sensitivity analysis iterations using thresholds of £30,000/QALY, £20,000/QALY and £13,000/QALY, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to stopping the QOF and returning all associated incentive payments to the National Health Service, continuing the QOF is not cost-effective. To improve population health efficiently, the UK should redesign the QOF or pursue alternative interventions.

Association between a national primary care pay-for-performance scheme and suicide rates in England: spatial cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pay-for-performance policies aim to improve population health by incentivising improvements in quality of care.AimsTo assess the relationship between general practice performance on severe mental illness (SMI) and depression indicators under a national incentivisation scheme and suicide risk in England for the period 2006-2014. METHOD: Longitudinal spatial analysis for 32 844 small-area geographical units (lower super output areas, LSOAs), using population-structure adjusted numbers of suicide as the outcome variable. Negative binomial models were fitted to investigate the relationship between spatially estimated recorded quality of care and suicide risk at the LSOA level. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were adjusted for deprivation, social fragmentation, prevalence of depression and SMI as well as other 2011 Census variables. RESULTS: No association was found between practice performance on the mental health indicators and suicide incidence in practice localities (IRR=1.000, 95% CI 0.998-1.002). IRRs indicated elevated suicide risks linked with area-level social fragmentation (1.030; 95% CI 1.027-1.034), deprivation (1.013, 95% CI 1.012-1.014) and rurality (1.059, 95% CI 1.027-1.092). CONCLUSIONS: Primary care has an important role to play in suicide prevention, but we did not observe a link between practices' higher reported quality of care on incentivised mental health activities and lower suicide rates in the local population. It is likely that effective suicide prevention needs a more concerted, multiagency approach. Better training in suicide prevention for general practitioners is also essential. These findings pertain to the UK but have relevance to other countries considering similar programmes.Declaration of interestNone.

Increasing socioeconomic gap between the young and old: temporal trends in health and overall deprivation in England by age, sex, urbanity and ethnicity, 2004-2015.

BACKGROUND: At a low geographical level, little is known about the associations between population characteristics and deprivation, and their trends, which would be directly affected by the house market, labour pressures and government policies. We describe temporal trends in health and overall deprivation in England by age, sex, urbanity and ethnicity. METHODS: Repeated cross-sectional whole population study for England, 2004-2015, at a low geographical level (average 1500 residents). We calculated weighted medians of the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) for each subgroup of interest. RESULTS: Over time, we observed increases in relative deprivation for people aged under 30, and aged 30-59, while median deprivation decreased for those aged 60 or over. Subgroup analyses indicated that relative overall deprivation was consistently higher for young adults (aged 20-29) and infants (aged 0-4), with increases in deprivation for the latter. Levels of overall deprivation in 2004 greatly varied by ethnicity, with the lowest levels observed for White British and the highest for Blacks. Over time, small reductions were observed in the deprivation gap between White British and all other ethnic groups. Findings were consistent across overall IMD and its health and disability subdomain, but large regional variability was also observed. CONCLUSIONS: Government policies, the financial crisis of 2008, education funding and the increasing cost of houses relative to real wages are important parameters in interpreting our findings. Socioeconomic deprivation is an important determinant of health and the inequalities this work highlights may have significant implications for future fiscal and healthcare policy.