The extent of the two tier service for fundholders

Abstract

Objective: To examine possible differential changes in outpatient referrals to orthopaedic clinics, attendances, and waiting times between fundholding and non-fundholding general practitioners.

Design: Observational controlled study of referrals by general practitioners to orthopaedic outpatients between April 1991 and March 1995.

Setting: District health authority in south-west England.

Subjects: 10 fundholding practices with 108,300 registered patients; 22 control practices with 159,900 registered patients.

Main outcome measures: Changes in age standardised referral and outpatient attendance ratios for the year before and the two years after achieving fundholder status; changes in outpatient waiting times.

Results: In the year before achieving fundholding status both groups were referring more patients than were being seen. Two years later, referral and attendance ratios had increased by 13% and 36% respectively for fundholders and 32% and 59% for controls, and both groups were referring fewer patients than were being seen. Attendances represented 112% of referrals for fundholders and 104% for controls. In 1991-2, a similar proportion of patients in the two groups was seen within three months of referral. The two hospitals that set up specific clinics exclusively for fundholders showed faster access for patients of fundholders by 1993-4, as did a third hospital without such clinics by 1994-5.

Conclusions: Fundholders increased their orthopaedic referrals less than did controls and achieved a better balance between outpatient appointments and referrals. Their patients were likely to be seen more quickly, particularly if the hospital provided special clinics exclusively for fundholders. Lack of case mix information makes it impossible to judge whether these differences benefit or disadvantage patients.