The rapid pace of NHS reform means that the pharmaceutical industry needs new strategies for joint working to create and sustain commercial opportunities. Diana Vegh, NHS Partnership Manager at the ABPI, describes how the Association is working to develop a joined-up partnership strategy across the new NHS landscape.

The NHS has been going through one of the largest reorganisations since its inception – Sir David Nicholson famously describing it as “so big, you can see it from space” – and the implications for the pharmaceutical industry, particularly regarding the joint working agenda, are significant. So much so that the ABPI has established an NHS Partnerships Team, led by Kevin Blakemore, with one senior manager covering each of the four NHS England regional offices. The concept has been driven by Stephen Whitehead, our CEO, and was piloted several years ago as the ABPI Outreach Team – which made constructive inroads in the South-West, a challenging health economy to work in.

I am one of those regional managers, ex-NHS and industry, based in Devon, and covering a territory that stretches from Penzance to Margate. The population is 13.4 million, with a budget of £21.1 billion and 110 NHS organisations. There are 1,873 GP practices, 34 local authorities (with three unitaries), four clinical senates, five Academic Health Science Networks, seven Area Teams, three specialised commissioning hubs and 51 CCGs. And it’s a 14-hour return journey from one end to the other. Plus we’re a trade association, with limited resources. With such a large number of potential customers and new organisations, how do we make the best use of our time?

RIGS strike oil

Each of us has produced a regional business plan, aligned to member company priorities, broadly supporting our themes of value and partnership, and clustered around 11 core corporate objectives. These have all been discussed and agreed by our Board of Management, which is made up of member company executives. The most important objective for my team is improving the environment for access and uptake of innovative medicines. We’ve segmented our rapidly evolving customer base and developed stakeholder maps for engagement. But pivotal to helping us navigate this complex structure has been the establishment of our Regional Industry Groups or RIGs, one per region, which meet monthly. General managers of our member companies have nominated senior representatives to sit on these groups, and we are adding associates who will join us virtually, i.e. online, via WebEx and telephone conferencing.

My RIG is chaired by Lisa Rosewarne from MSD, and our deputy Chair is James Steed from Pfizer. We have agreed our Terms of Reference and work plan for 2013, with a series of five workstreams and virtual task and finish groups led by RIG members, focusing on industry-wide issues from medicines optimisation to the Formularies Good Practice Guide. We often have external speakers who may not meet with single companies but are happy to talk to a group – such as Steve Sparks from NICE, who manages the field-based Implementation Team, and who recently gave an excellent presentation at one of our meetings. We also connect our RIG to the national policy work we do, and communicate across the other ABPI teams.

We’ve had a number of ‘bids’ from the NHS and healthcare companies who are interested in working with the pharmaceutical that there is a need for external organisations to understand better what joint working truly means in terms of the ‘Moving Beyond Sponsorship’ work done by the ABPI and the Department of Health in 2010. Our key tool for this has been the Joint Working Guide, and in particular the sections on pages 7 and 8. One of our RIG workstreams is to use these guidelines to engage with potential partners in order to share constructive feedback and highlight examples of best practice that we are collecting from member companies.

We showcased this at a conference with the NHS Confederation in February this year, in London. We have a Memorandum of Understanding with the NHS Confederation and the ABHI to work on the Innovation, Health and Wealth agenda collectively; and this national policy work is essentially what we’re putting into practice in our regions.

Rules of engagement

In my day-to-day job and in my meetings with NHS stakeholders, I work to promote the whole pharmaceutical industry and a more mature working relationship with us. The majority of my discussions have been very positive, with a clear desire to move away from the old models of promotional metrics and explore a new way of working. Some CCGs, such as Torbay and South Devon, are striving to be ahead of the curve. Others are more conservative and prefer to agree a new policy on joint working first, and we’re trying to encourage the use of our toolkit and case studies.

But one thing I’m very clear to emphasise is that my team isn’t ‘the’ route into pharmaceutical companies. If an NHS organisation wishes to work directly with a company, of course it can. We are not competing with market access teams – we are enablers and facilitators – and the ABPI Code of Practice gives the NHS assurances about governance and conduct. But some organisations remain difficult to reach. I’m using good examples of joint working elsewhere in the NHS, or pragmatic discussions in other parts of the organisation, to overcome those barriers.

After all, partnership isn’t about pretending that everything’s fine and there aren’t any problems. But it is about moving to a place where you can agree to disagree, and solve your problems together even if you have differences. . e table above shows the framework I base my work on.

On the whole, projects seem to fall into three categories. The first category is disease specific projects, which often relate to long-term conditions such as COPD, diabetes or vascular health. Some of these can be quite broad, while others can be about specific service redesign projects in a particular health economy and relate to implementing new national guidance. The second category is projects that relate to an NHS priority, such as reducing inequalities, where industry expertise in social marketing and media has been put to excellent use. The final category, and the one expanding most rapidly, is where we have shared aims: improving patient safety, reducing medicines wastage, better adherence, realising the benefits of treatments – i.e. the medicines optimisation agenda.

Moving the goalposts

Those of you with a lot of experience may be reading this with a sceptical eye. Hasn’t this all been done before? Talked about before?

Yes. But this time, there are some key differences. The clinical voice is louder, and often in a leadership position. Attention is far more on quality than in the past, and the sanctions are greater. And while our austere financial climate is squeezing medicines spending, increasingly senior people are seeing that it is disingenuous to look at medicines solely as a cost pressure, and far more beneficial to see them as a means of improving health outcomes – on which the NHS is now being more tightly measured. New organisations also have a legal duty to innovate, which is now in primary legislation as part of the Health and Social Care Act. The new Academic Health Science Networks have been set up as companies, and though many focus on the earlier part of the medicines life cycle they will all be looking for new partnerships.

Pharmaceutical companies are also changing. We’ve gone from Share of Voice to Key Account Management, and the skills and competency mix of pharmaceutical field teams is very different from how it was a few years ago. When I’m out and about I’m meeting people with new roles, such as service development managers, NHS business managers and strategic account managers. And there have been a lot of redundancies in the NHS which have seen knowledge and skills move into the pharmaceutical industry. Today I had an email from a CCG asking me how they could second someone into an ABPI member company.

We are in a ‘perfect storm’ of policy, and the organisational turbulence we’ve all experienced is bringing some very forward-thinking and creative people into senior positions. Let’s make the most of that, and work together to get better outcomes for the populations that we live in and for the organisations that employ us.

The ABPI sets out to deliver tailored support and advice to healthcare providers on the medicines its member companies produce. Kevin Blakemore, NHS Partnerships Manager at the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, discusses the advantage of partnerships in healthcare.

The pharmaceutical industry has experienced tremendous change and, as part of that evolution, forming successful partnerships in healthcare has become integral to our way of working. The NHS delivers outstanding care to patients – utilising the innovative medicines the pharmaceutical industry produces – so it makes perfect sense for us to work together, ensuring the best possible outcomes for patients. There are some points, however, to consider when embarking on ‘joint working’ ventures – these partnerships must be managed and guided to ensure that the process is efficient, seamless and offers patients maximum benefit.

Often these partnerships can result in patients spending less time in secondary care settings, and can deliver significant savings. Patients benefit most when those with a stake in their care work effectively, enthusiastically and efficiently together.

Joint working describes situations where, for the benefit of patients, NHS and industry, organisations pool skills, experiences and resources for the joint development and implementation of patient centred projects and a shared commitment to creating a streamlined, joined-up care pathway, where patients are kept at the heart.

Flexible joints
Joint working has already benefited thousands of patients across the UK and to help achieve greater outcomes, the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) has developed the ‘NHS Partnerships Team’. My dedicated team work with healthcare providers up and down the country, providing specialist advice and support, while facilitating successful working relationships.

The NHS Partnerships team is made up of eight individuals, each responsible for a different area of England. Their knowledge and expertise includes experience of working within the pharmaceutical industry and the NHS. They also bring their knowledge of innovative and effective medicines created by the industry, and this can be utilised for the benefit of patients. The central focus of the team is improving the healthcare environment in order to increase access to and uptake of innovative products. The team consists of Diana Vegh, Karen Thomas, Carol Blount, Harriet Lewis, Andy Riley, Mike Ringe, Angela Logun and myself.

Diana Vegh started her career in the pharmaceutical industry within regulatory affairs in AstraZeneca, working in scientific roles of increasing seniority. She then moved to the NHS where she held senior positions in the Strategic Health Authority, two PCTs and a Foundation Trust in the South West.
Diana returned to industry in a commercial capacity at UCB Pharma, working in market access for products. She has extensive networks across the industry and the NHS, and a wealth of practical, positive experience.

Veteran’s parade
Karen Thomas – a recent addition to the NHS Partnerships Team – has extensive experience of working in the pharmaceutical industry, and for the past 12 years Karen has worked for Bristol Myers Squibb, where her roles spanned finances, sales, commercial and market access, covering several therapeutic disease areas. Karen joined the ABPI in November 2012 as the Regional Partnership Manager for London.

Harriet Lewis has been a pharmacist for over 20 years. She has worked in a wide range of healthcare sectors including industry, community, hospital and primary care. Before joining the ABPI, Harriet’s most recent role was Associate Director for Medicines Advice with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Harriet has led on a number of NHS support programmes, including local formularies, local decision making, controlled drugs, accountable officers and ‘specials’. She has authored several key documents for NPC and NICE. Harriet is the Regional Partnership Manager for the North.

Most recent additions to the team are Andy Riley and Mike Ringe. Andy joins us as the ABPI Regional NHS Partnership Manager for Midlands and East. He qualified as a pharmacist in 1987 and has held posts in hospitals, community pharmacies and health authorities in London, the North West and the West Midlands. Mike joins us as the ABPI Group Therapy Manager directly from the NHS, and previously held the position of Chief Operating Officer at Luton Clinical Commissioning Group.

My role is the NHS Partnerships Manager and I manage the team. Previously, I have worked in the pharmaceutical industry for over 25 years – at UCB and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) – and I have been responsible for developing national level methodologies and frameworks to support patient and market access programmes.

Bonded by blood
The ABPI recently undertook a joint working project at a hospital trust in the North of England looking at epistaxis – one of the most common ENT emergencies in England, with over 27,000 patients presented to secondary care between 2008 and 2011. In 2009/10 the trust admitted 250 patients presenting the condition, with the average length of stay at over two days, costing a minimum of £400 per patient per day.

Like many other hospitals, the trust had limited specialist ENT experience in their emergency departments, and as a consequence nasal packing was frequently used as a first line treatment – even for small volume bleeding – when a more conservative or targeted approach would have been safe and effective. There was a clear opportunity here for the patient pathway to be revised and a different approach taken.

Through the ABPI, a joint working project was instigated between a local pharmaceutical company and the trust. They jointly agreed – through a joint working agreement – to truly address the challenges within the current treatment regime and completely redesign the service. Consequently, it addressed the training requirements within A&E and junior doctors.

The new treatment pathway encouraged clinicians to identify the bleeding point, if possible, and in cases of continued bleeding, to consider the use of a product manufactured by the local company – thereby avoiding unnecessary hospital admissions. The company and trust continued to work in partnership to develop training materials in order to develop the new treatment pathway and introduce the use of the medicine where possible.

This venture resulted in a number of positive outcomes, which included a reduction in hospital stays, improving productivity and cost savings. But most importantly, when compared with the three preceding years, the audit of the venture showed that the total number of bed days due to epistaxis, was reduced by 30 per cent and length of stay was reduced by 21 per cent. Additionally, staff were motivated to consider an alternative to immediate nasal packing/admission, which also resulted in a reduction in the length of stay.

QIPP while ahead
Working with the Department of Health and the NHS, we have developed a toolkit on successful joint working. Joint working is a relatively new concept for many, but has already shown tangible benefits to patients, the NHS and industry. For example:

East Lincolnshire Primary Care Trust (PCT) reduced hospital admissions for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) by 23%, through working with three companies to target and screen patients, train clinicians and set up specific COPD clinics.

In Ashton Leigh and Wigan the PCT is tackling low life expectancy, high rates of heart disease and diabetes by working with industry on a ‘Find and Treat’ strategy.

The innovative approach to patient care adopted by that trust was aligned with the Quality, Innovation, Productivity and Prevention (QIPP) programme. QIPP is an NHS initiative to improve the quality of care it delivers, while at the same time making savings that can be reinvested into the service. It engages with staff from across the NHS, at local and regional level, and is supported by QIPP plans and work streams that provide guidance and tools.

The NHS also works with a range of partners to deliver QIPP, one of which is the pharmaceutical industry. Apart from supplying medicines that improve the quality of patients’ lives and outcomes, the industry can contribute business skills and expertise, as well as extensive knowledge of the therapy areas relevant to its medicines.

Joint working is the foundation for creating, developing and implementing innovative healthcare solutions which can lead to better health outcomes. We believe this is the way forward in healthcare and both the NHS and industry must seek out more opportunities to work together.

Novartis expects its pharmaceutical division to have at least 14 ‘blockbuster’ products within the next five years.

The Group claims to lead the industry with the number of new approvals it has had globally since 2007 and expects the release of new products to be equally successful.

Joseph Jimenez, CEO of Novartis, said its “leading pipeline... positions us well for continued future growth.”

So far this year the company has received nine approvals or positive recommendations. It aims to build on this within the next 13 to 24 months with a further 11 pivotal trials, 11 filings and 10 regulatory decisions with various health authorities.

In addition, Novartis claims its pipeline boasts 139 projects in clinical development, including more than 73 New Molecular Entities across a multitude of disease areas.

It has highlighted compounds AIN457 from its oncology pipeline and LCZ696 and RLX030 for heart failure to create “significant newsflow” in the future. Also, Novartis claims compound QVA149 has the potential to become the “new standard of care for COPD”.

But within its oncology business is where the greatest growth is expected within the next five years. Novartis points towards its robust late-stage pipeline, which includes 13 new chemical entities and 19 new indications, to combat the upcoming patent expiry on Glivec.

These late-stage products are expected to contribute more than $1bn in sales by 2017, with Afinitor predicted to earn revenues of around $2bn in sales in advanced breast cancer alone in the same period.

Is QIPP really about ‘doing more with less’?

The NHS Quality, Innovation, Productivity and Prevention (QIPP) Challenge was launched in March 2010 as a strategy to facilitate major cost savings within the NHS, in response to the impact of the global recession. The principle of QIPP was that given the need for austerity budgeting, serious planning and rethinking were needed to ensure ‘smart’ cost-cutting that did not harm patient outcomes. The QIPP agenda was about identifying solutions that held together the four key principles, reducing overall costs by making interventions more timely, efficient and effective.

The new Government’s NHS reforms promised to facilitate QIPP by empowering local providers and commissioners to develop the best solutions for their communities. However, the economic pressures on CCGs and Foundation Trusts within the new system, combined with the ‘Nicholson challenge’ of cutting £5 billion out of the NHS budget in each of four successive years, have meant that the dominant theme of QIPP at a local level is cost reduction.

The first full year of QIPP (2011–12) delivered savings of £5.8 billion against a target of $5 billion. However, reports of NHS rationing and ‘postcode prescribing’ have proliferated. QIPP was devised as a strategy to combine two goals: the shift towards community-based healthcare and the urgent drive towards NHS cost-cutting. Is that still the agenda, or have the pressures of NHS reform reduced its four principles to one: reducing expenditure? Is QIPP really about “doing more with less”, as Andrew Lansley claimed, or is it just about doing with less?

A new healthcare paradigm
The DH booklet introducing the QIPP challenge in March 2010 set the context: “The NHS needs to identify £15–20 billion of efficiency savings by the end of 2013/14 that can be reinvested in the service to continue to deliver year on year quality improvements.” The booklet placed emphasis on improving quality while reducing overall costs through strategies such as early intervention, improved infection control and home-based care. Its authors included Jim Easton, then National Director for Improvement and Efficiency. The DH described a series of QIPP ‘workstreams’ it was setting up to help clinical teams and NHS organisations “improve quality and productivity across care pathways”. The first of these related to care of long-term conditions, urgent care and end-of-life care. Further workstreams would examine safety challenges, such as pressure ulcers (bedsores), and ‘right care’ issues such as referral management and identifying “low-value treatments” (later to become controversial issues).

The authors called for “a collective response at local, regional and national level” to address the QIPP priorities. These included early diagnosis, primary and secondary prevention and patient self-management. The need for “better partnerships between primary, community and secondary care to support people with long-term conditions” was emphasised. QIPP extended from the “daily clinical practice” of individual HCPs to “the wider care pathway”, the booklet said. Each SHA had its own QIPP lead and innovation lead, and was establishing an online regional ‘quality observatory’ and Innovation Fund to help clinical teams improve quality and productivity.

These ideas were illustrated by case studies where local NHS organisations had developed better and more affordable healthcare solutions. These included the use of an electronic system to ‘re-engineer’ blood transfusion, reducing waste and improving safety; and systematic guidance on antibiotic prescribing to reduce rates of C. difficile infection. These solutions all involved using teamwork and sharing information to make the best use of available resources.

The booklet ended on a warning note: “If we do not respond to this challenge there is a real risk that the need to cut costs will overtake our best intentions to improve care for our patients.” More than two years later, the crucial question is: has QIPP averted that outcome or brought it closer?

Innovation is ‘core activity’
In June 2012, Nicholson’s annual report claimed 2011/12 had been “a remarkable year” for the NHS. He highlighted the contribution of local initiatives to maintaining service quality while cutting costs. Austerity would dominate the NHS “for the foreseeable future”, he said. However, the innovation agenda promoted by the previous Government’s Office for Life Science and revived by the current Government in December 2011 would engage dynamically with that challenge: “Innovation has to... become the core activity of the NHS.”

His report went through the elements of QIPP, noting achievements in each area. Quality achievements highlighted included: in cancer care, the achievement of key treatment standards across all eight performance measures, as well as improved early detection figures; and in stroke care, better access to specialist stroke units and faster treatment of people with transient ischaemic attacks. Community-based asthma services in South East Essex were used as an example of a successful local initiative.

The brief section on innovation focused largely on the use of technologies in the community, including telehealth and home dialysis. The preventative care section emphasised the growing role of health visitors, and drew attention to the success of a national screening campaign for risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) with prophylactic drug treatment given where needed.

In the productivity section, Nicholson noted QIPP savings of £5.8bn and praised the “modest reduction in activity levels” across the NHS – placing these in the context of the QIPP Long-term Condition Workstream, which aims to reduce unscheduled hospital admissions by 20%, reduce hospital stay length by 25%, and maximise the role of “supported care planning” in helping people to manage their own health. However, no reference was made to the rationing of procedures or the cuts in hospital nurse staffing.

Milestones or millstones?
A recent Health Service Journal report on the DH’s QIPP tracker indicates that the PCTs (soon to be abolished) plan savings worth £13bn nationwide between now and 2015, with £4.5bn of this to be achieved through the 53 local QIPP plans. The planned savings are front-loaded: £3.8bn this year and £3.6bn, £2.9bn and £2.6bn in the next three years. However, only £2bn of the planned QIPP savings are currently being achieved on schedule, and only six local QIPP plans are on track with all of their workstreams.

According to the tracker, productivity gains are the main objective of most local initiatives. Common features include the redesign of care pathways for long-term conditions, including diabetes and COPD, and the development of integrated care teams for dementia patients. However, many local plans have the single goal of reducing the cost of services – for example, South of Tyne and Wear PCT notes as an objective: “reduce price paid for Gateshead Health Foundation Trust older people’s mental health service”.

John Appleby, chief economist of the King’s Fund, commented that this emphasis on savings denied the original point of QIPP: “to improve value to patients”. He also said there was no evidence of the money saved being reinvested in future services, which was a key principle of the original QIPP agenda. The Audit Commission has since reported that the NHS has £4bn in “uncommitted finances”: cash reserves created by aggressive cost-cutting. Mike Farrar, Chief Executive of the NHS Confederation, has argued that this money needs to be invested in community and primary care.

Jim Easton, the NHS Commissioning Board’s Director of Improvement and Transformation, warned in July that too many NHS organisations were relying on spending cuts without any element of service redesign. The “deeper change” of shifting healthcare to the community was not being undertaken, he said, and
QIPP was becoming a “label” for “cost improvement plans”. As a result, the QIPP savings of the past year would be very difficult to repeat. Instead of building a new healthcare model, the NHS was just cutting
parts of the old one.

Easton has since announced that the Board will fund a new innovation body to deliver a “system-wide” response to the QIPP challenge. From April 2013, the new organisation will replace all existing NHS innovation and technology adoption bodies. He anticipates that it will “provide hands-on support for great models of care” developed within and beyond the healthcare sector. However, his resignation has cast a shadow over these plans.

According to the King’s Fund, 27 of 42 NHS finance directors it surveyed believe there is a high risk that the NHS will fail to meet the ‘Nicholson challenge’. A key question for industry, and for patients, is whether QIPP can help the NHS deliver on the more important challenge of transforming healthcare to meet the
changing needs of the population.

NHS Alliance focuses on CCGs’ best practice

The NHS Alliance has published a best practice guide focusing on the success of 12 different CCGs across England.

The guide – Clinical Commissioning in Action – outlines how commissioning projects have helped increase standards of patient care whilst meeting financial targets.

The document outlines how CCGs hold the “key to the future of the NHS” and many clinical commissioners are “already demonstrating their potential to make a real difference”.

“Where real progress has happened, it was only possible through meaningful partnerships combined with willingness and determination from those involved in bringing about change,” the guide says.

“These clinical commissioners have tackled issues head on, drawing on experience of front line staff, their knowledge of the local community and working with local managers.

“Was it easy? Mostly not. Was it worth it? Absolutely. Patients were placed at the heart of the health care system and services were designed to meet their needs.”

The guide states how doctors have often known how to tackle local health issues but have “lacked the mechanisms” to bring about change. But CCGs have given GPs “that leverage” and the opportunity to improve local services has been “seized with both hands”.

Unplanned admissions
NHS Newcastle West and Newcastle North and East CCGs aimed to reduce hospital admissions by providing staff at care homes across the city training, support and input from local GPs.

The scheme was initiated after a hospital doctor found care home residents were admitted as emergencies at an average cost of £8,225 per day. A third of patients were discharged the same day and half within two days. But nearly a fifth (18%) died – many within five days of admission.

To tackle this, the CCGs allocated a link GP who would make regular visits to care homes and build relationships. Staff were also given training on topics such as wound management, falls and also care planning to support individuals who wished to die in their own homes.

The new measures resulted in a 9% reduction in unplanned admissions from care homes, same day discharges being reduced by a quarter and 27% fewer patients dying within a day of being admitted to hospital.

The cost of the project - £250,000 in the first year – was funded by practice-based commissioning savings with ongoing costs expected to be lower as the scheme continues. But savings are “at least as substantial”, the guide said.

David Thorne, Chief Operating Officer, Newcastle West CCG, said the engagement of the GPs had been “vital” to develop the scheme. “GPs instinctively ‘get it’,” he said. “I have not met a GP yet who doesn’t say that this is really important work.”

Bridging the gulf
Collaborative working between NHS South Devon and Torbay CCG and secondary care clinicians aimed to provide safe follow up care to men who have raised prostate specific antigen levels which need monitoring. 

The CCG was keen to avoid visits to outpatient clinics and a worrying six month wait for results for often elderly patients. It has now adopted a model first pioneered in Bath enabling patients to have blood tests locally, who are then contacted with their results. Visits to hospitals are only required if tests are outside the expected range or if patients are concerned about their symptoms.

It is estimated that the new model may save up to 1,500 outpatient appointments annually and generate “substantial potential financial savings,” the guide says.

The scheme was designed by secondary care doctors and GPs working in partnership in a clinical pathway group for urology. Firstly, a consultant decides if a patient is suitable for monitoring. If so, the details are entered into a PSA computer system. Using this information, a urology nurse ensures patients are contacted when they need a check up – which is conducted at a GP surgery. The nurse then contacts the patient again to tell them whether additional tests are required.

Dr Derek Greatorex, CCG co-chair, said the project was a “no brainer”: “It was by far the most convenient robust approach and it meets the needs of the patient.

“The whole impetus of our clinical pathway groups is to improve collaboration and get over the gulf between primary and secondary care. Sometimes it does not take much of a change to make a difference.”

Reducing prescribing costs
NHS Bassetlaw CCG introduced new prescribing practices in an attempt to become more efficient whilst improving standards of care. Ensuring that best practice is followed in prescribing is a difficult and complex task. However, the CCG was able to improve prescribing practice and reduce costs.

Working in tandem with constituent practices, commissioners were able to reduce prescription costs by nearly 10% and create savings of £1.5 million. Despite the savings, patients were never denied required medication. In fact, prescribing rates for certain drugs actually increased during the efficiency drive.
CCG Chair Dr Stephen Kell said that clinical engagement played a major part in meeting set targets. “Comparing ourselves with where we should be really got our hearts and minds together,” he said.

“Having a meaningful practice-led discussion was really important. By meeting together and sharing good practice we have been able to drive down prescribing costs. Unnecessary prescribing is inefficient prescribing and not beneficial for patients.”

Dr Kell also pointed towards the relatively small size of the CCG in helping make the scheme a success. “Size is always an issue in terms of running costs but it does enable change,” he added. “The key driver for GPs is undoubtedly patients. Everything they do should be with that in mind.”

Long-term conditions
Joint working between a pharmaceutical company and Rushcliffe CCG aimed to improve COPD pathways for long-term sufferers. The project aimed to develop an integrated COPD service which covers patients from screening and diagnosis through management in the community to hospital care.

The pharmaceutical company provided a specialist COPD nurse who worked in GP practices across the region with a high rate of COPD-related emergency admissions. The nurse provided support and improved management of patients identified as high risk, whilst working alongside practice colleagues.

The CCG also introduced a number of new measures including distributing self-management booklets to patients, a subscription to Metcheck so individuals can be forewarned of any adverse weather that may affect their condition, and a commissioned clinic at a primary care centre to keep patients out of hospital.
Also, patients had access to exercise classes at a local leisure centre to improve fitness levels and increased access to pulmonary rehabilitation services that meet NICE guidelines.

The outcome of the new services saw emergency hospital admissions for COPD sufferers in the area fall below 700 in 2011/12. The year before there were more than 800 emergency admissions, with more than 900 cases in 2009/10.

Dr Neil Fraser, long-term conditions lead for the CCG, said the introduction of new services has also seen the total cost of COPD treatment fall. “The expensive thing is often the thing that is bad for the patient as well,” he said.

“GPs have championed the improvements to services and have worked closely with specialist nurses. There has been a debate and conversation with GPs about how it has developed.”

A new report from NHS Clinical Commissioners (NHSCC), based on a simulation exercise, aims to help CCGs meet their commissioning support unit needs.

A scenario workshop held in May 2012 explored how CCGs can most effectively draw on CSU resources when commissioning local services.

The report identifies the need of CCGs for greater clarity on the CSU options available to them and how the organisations can best work together.

It describes how six emerging CCGs, four CSUs and an acute hospital trust worked together to develop an operational plan, redesign COPD services, and implement the redesign.

Key learning points identified in the report included:

• CCGs need to understand the support options available to them locally and nationally, while CSUs need to market their services more effectively.

• Both CCGs and CSUs need to understand when clinical leadership is necessary in commissioning and when other CCG members can lead the process.

• The role of the wider clinical team, including nurses and hospital specialists, in guiding the commissioning process needs to be developed.

• The customer/supplier relationship between CCGs and CSUs needs to be explored and tested.

Julie Wood (pictured), Interim Commissioning Development Director at NHSCC, said: “It is absolutely crucial that clinical commissioners receive the support they need to create a robust strategy for their work with commissioning support services.

“Not only do CCGs need a lot more clarity on the options available to them in terms of using CSSs, but they also need to be able to access a range of practical support which is relevant to their requirements.”

Dame Barbara Hakin, National Director of Commissioning Development, commented: “There is still a great deal of work to do to ensure that clinical commissioners have all the support they need, and we have used the insights from this report to inform the next phase of the NHS Commissioning Board Authority’s programme of practical, targeted CCG and CSU development support.”

A new chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) toolkit for commissioners has been published by the Department of Health.

A series of best practice guidelines are included in the document in an attempt to make healthcare professionals make informed decisions on COPD cases.

Professor Sue Hill and Dr Robert Winter “urged” NHS colleagues to use the guidelines “to make a real difference to the lives of people with COPD”.

The toolkit has been developed to make it easier to commission improved services for people with COPD and to bring together “the clinical, financial and commercial aspects” of commissioning.

It supports the delivery of the Outcomes Strategy for COPD and Asthma and includes advice on spirometry and assessment, pulmonary rehabilitation, managing exacerbations and details on the case for home oxygen assessment and review.

COPD causes around 23,000 deaths in England each year and costs the NHS more than £800m annually.

More than 44 new indicators have been proposed in the first Commissioning Outcomes Framework (COF) by NICE.

The proposed indicators include care for stroke patients, plus ones for COPD, maternal care and access to mental health services.

The ‘menu’ of indicators covers the five domains outlined in the NHS Outcomes Framework.

Professor Danny Keenan, COF Advisory Committee Chair, said he hoped the “robust” set of indicators would “lead to improved health outcomes”.

From April next year, the COF will be used to hold CCGs to account for improvement in quality of local healthcare and patient outcomes through the services they commission.

The indicators have been developed using the Outcomes Framework, NICE Quality Standards and existing indicator collections, such as national audits.

A further menu of indicators will now be developed using NICE’s quality standards to ensure that all topics are covered.

Dr Gillian Leng, Deputy Chief Executive and Director of Health and Social Care at NICE, said the indicators will “support high quality commissioning”.

“Each indicator has been through public consultation and feasibility testing (conducted by the Health and Social Care Information Centre), so commissioners can be reassured that they will work in practice,” she said.

The final selection of indicators that will be included within the 2013/14 COF will be decided by the NHS Commissioning Board later this year.

NICE has proposed 16 new indicators for inclusion in the 2013/14 Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) as a new clinical area.

The recommendations include four for RA, two for men with diabetes, plus indicators for COPD rehabilitation and hypertension.

Dr Gillian Leng, Deputy Chief Executive and Director of Health and Social Care at NICE, said the potential indicators “can make a real difference” to improve standards of care.

QOF is a voluntary incentive scheme that rewards GPs for implementing systematic improvements in care for patients. It operates through a points system which rewards doctors for their performance against the indicators.

Indicators for RA include GP practices creating a register of patients aged over 16, and patients being assessed for cardiovascular risk and fracture risk.

In men with diabetes, indicators focus on offering advice on erectile dysfunction and on available treatment options.

The final ‘menu’ of indicators will be decided by NHS Employers and the British Medical Association later this year.

The NHS operating framework provides the blueprint for the NHS in England. Pf examines its objectives around quality and reform.

The Operating Framework for the NHS in England 2012/13 is an important document for UK medical sales professionals. It outlines the national priorities, system levers and mechanisms that the NHS in England must focus on to improve patient care. The strategic framework details expectations for the NHS’ ongoing efficiency challenge and the transition to the new commissioning and management system. It sets out the planning, performance and financial requirements for NHS organisations and the basis on which they will be held to account. With QIPP imperatives at the heart of the strategy, proactive pharmaceutical companies that can demonstrate an ability to help NHS customers deliver efficiencies and improve qualities in areas of national priority will be best placed to succeed.

The Framework identifies four key themes for NHS organisations in 2012/13:

1. Putting patients at the centre of decision making in preparing for an outcomes approach to service delivery
2. Completing the final year of transition to the new system
3. Accelerating the delivery of the QIPP challenge
4. Maintaining a strong grip on services and financial performance.

Quality - a focus on outcomes

The Operating Framework says that the NHS’ model of delivery must be overhauled in 2012/13 to become a system driven by quality and outcomes. It identifies the Outcomes Framework as the catalyst for this – with its focus on clinical outcomes and the reduction of health inequalities driving changes in culture, behaviour and service delivery. The Outcomes Framework sets out the improvements against which the NHS
Commissioning Board will be held to account from 2013/14.

These measurements are set out within five domains:

Domain 1: preventing people from dying prematurely.

Domain 2: enhancing quality of life for people with long-term conditions.

Domain 3: helping people recover from episodes of ill health or following injury.

Domain 4: ensuring people have a positive experience of care.

Domain 5: treating and caring for people in a safe environment and protecting them from avoidable harm.

The Operating Framework details a range of indicators for each domain, all of which are explored in the NHS Outcomes Framework. These will be supported by NICE quality standards, which provide definitions of what high-quality care should look like for a particular pathway of care. The document also advises NHS organisations to meet the service specific outcomes strategies that have already been published in areas such as mental health, cancer, COPD, asthma and long-term conditions.

Each domain in the NHS Outcomes Framework has a strong relevance to pharma, whether through the development of medicines to treat disease in priority areas, or via collaborative service design to move care closer to patients’ homes and reduce hospital admissions. Organisations that are able to show how their innovations can improve a care pathway or be used as part of a redesigned service will enjoy
more positive NHS engagement.

The Operating Framework identifies dementia and care of older people as a key priority, and sets clear goals to integrate health and social care. It also highlights examples of initiatives where NHS organisations have successfully improved services in line with each of the four key elements of QIPP; quality, innovation, productivity and prevention.

Reform - the transition blueprint

The Operating Framework outlines the key milestones for the reorganisation of the NHS. Whilst the headlines are widely known, it is interesting to track current progress against a timetable that was set out many months before the Health & Social Care Act was passed. The Framework notes that by
the end of 2012/13:

“The NHS will have transformed the commissioning landscape into one focused on local clinical decision
making, with the development and authorisation of CCGs, assisted by commissioning support vehicles and overseen by the NHS Commissioning Board. Local authorities will take the lead role in public health, alongside the new Public Health England. Central to the new system will be the establishment of Health & Wellbeing Boards (HWB), who will provide local systems leadership across health, social care and public health. Alongside this, developments will continue to the provider landscape, through the extension of Any Qualified Provider (AQP), progress with the NHS Foundation Trust (FT) pipeline and the establishment of the new NHS Trust Development Authority.”

Key 2012/13 objectives in the transition are as follows:

• PCTs and SHAs will remain statutory organisations until April 2013. They will be held to account on delivering performance and support the development of new organisations for clinical leadership. Clinical Senates and networks will be established
• PCTs will support CCG authorisation and the transition of power before March 2013
• HWBs will be established in shadow format, becoming statutorily operational from April 2013. They will act as the local system leader through JSNA and HWB Strategies
• CCGs must be coterminous with a single HWB ‘as far as possible’
• CCGs must: play an active role in planning and budgeting, develop relationships with local partners
  including social care, deliver their share of the QIPP agenda and identify how to secure commissioning support services in line with their running cost allowance
• Public Health England will become a statutory executive agency from April 2013
• NHS Trusts are expected to achieve FT status by April 2014
• PCT clusters should start to offer patients choice of AQP in at least three services that are local priorities. There should be a presumption of choice for most services from 2013/14.