The NHS England chair on rebuilding trust with the medical profession and the public
ADDRESSING INEQUALITY WITH SIMPLE SOLUTIONS
MaryAnn Ferreux on helping marginalised communities get the care they need FEMTECH IS NOT A CHARITY CASE
Lara Zibners talks about attitudes to opportunities within women’s health
“The current working experience in the NHS isn’t good. It wasn’t great when I was a frontline doctor, but back then, you just shrugged and got on with it. Nowadays, and quite rightly in many ways, people are saying that it isn’t acceptable...”
Few understand the healthcare landscape in England as well as Penny Dash. A former hospital doctor and partner at McKinsey, she is perhaps best known for leading two independent reviews commissioned by the government into the operational effectiveness of the Care Quality Commission late last year and into patient safety this year.
In an interview with Healthcare Today’s Adrian Murdoch, she talks about patient safety and effectiveness, how to achieve change in the NHS and how to rebuild trust with the public.
Also, in this issue, MaryAnn Ferreux, chief medical officer for Health Innovation Kent Surrey Sussex, talks about women’s health for all and how to help marginalised communities; paediatrician, educator, author and founder Lara Zibners discusses the future of female-led innovation and investors’ attitudes to opportunities within women’s health; and much more!
We hope you enjoy!
26-29 33-37
NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS AGAINST THE NHS RISE BY ALMOST 11%
NHS negligence claims have risen almost 11% over the past year to £3.1 billion, according to the latest annual report from NHS Resolution.
NHS Resolution received 14,428 new clinical negligence claims and reported incidents in 2024/25, reflecting ongoing broad stability in overall claims volume across recent years.
NHS Resolution’s provision for future liabilities at the end of March this year was up from £58.5 billion to £60.3 billion, driven by activity and natural growth. It is notable that those figures were lowered by changes to the Personal Injury Discount Rate from -0.25% to +0.50% and by updates to HM Treasury discount rates.
“At a time when NHS finances are in such a parlous state, and there is much to be done to transform patient care and services, it is right to question whether the sums paid out on NHS clinical negligence claims are sustainable,” said Steven Davies, head of legal services at Medical Protection Society. “NHS Resolution also estimates that over £60 billion is needed for future clinical negligence costs, making it one of the government’s largest liabilities.”
More than a third of the claims, some £1.3 billion of the total clinical negligence payments, related to maternity. This has been recognised by the NHS. As Healthcare Today reported in June, NHS Providers, the membership organisation for the NHS hospital, mental health, community and ambulance services, has called for bold action from the government to support them in their ongoing efforts to improve the quality and safety of maternity services in England.
“The standards of care in maternity services throughout the NHS are often so poor that women and families are left with no choice but to pursue legal action,” said Nisha Sharma, principal lawyer at Slater & Gordon.
“In our experience, finding the answers over what went wrong in a case is a prime motivator in doing so, as all too often NHS Trusts are reluctant or unwilling to engage with families who have been through such trauma and devastation, and lawyers can help in that process,” she continued.
“Reducing high-value maternity claims is not simply a legal or financial objective – it is a moral and professional imperative,” wrote Neil Rowe, head of practice at Maulin Law, for Healthcare Today.
He believes that the National Audit Office (NAO) investigation this autumn into clinical negligence costs will review the increase in long-term liabilities and annuities, and so will be particularly relevant to maternity litigation costs and may spur policy shifts.
But there is some good news too. The NHS Resolution report highlights that 83% of clinical claims are now
resolved without the need for legal proceedings. This means that 11,110 clinical compensation claims were resolved through dispute resolution processes rather than formal legal proceedings – the highest percentage ever achieved.
“By working collaboratively to resolve claims for compensation against the NHS, we are keeping patients, their families and healthcare staff out of court whilst sharing what we learn back with the NHS to prevent the same things happening again,” said Helen Vernon, chief executive of NHS Resolution.
The report also describes how innovations such as NHS Resolution’s Early Notification scheme for birth injury have enabled families to access compensation for immediate needs more rapidly.
“We unequivocally support and promote candour and that clinical staff should be open and transparent. Where there is a claim for compensation, this needs to be investigated in line with the law, but we always aim to resolve cases as quickly as possible to avoid distress to the family, with four in five cases resolving early on without the need to involve the courts,” said Vernon.
SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT INVESTS
£85M TO TACKLE DELAYED DISCHARGE
THE Scottish government has announced an £85 million investment to address the issue of the delayed discharge of patients from hospital and to provide care for patients in their own homes.
The Hospital at Home service is to be expanded to 2,000 beds by December next year. It predominantly provides care for frail, older people in their own homes and who may be suffering from acute illnesses and health conditions, including respiratory and cardiac conditions, infections, or treatment after a fall.
The funding will also be used to support the introduction of frailty services in every A&E department by the end of this summer, which aims to cut the average length of stay for vulnerable patients.
“I am resolutely focused on taking the necessary action to reduce wait times and clear the blockages leading to delayed discharges across our NHS. This investment will ensure many patients can receive first-class NHS care in the comfort of their own homes and not have to travel to a hospital where it isn’t required,” said first minister John Swinney.
The move is part of the Scottish government’s operational improvement plan, which was announced in March this year.
The 2025-26 Budget provides funding of £21 billion for health and social care services, with NHS boards across Scotland to receive an additional £2 billion to deliver key front-line services.
The plan brings focus to four critical areas that the government has
committed to deliver, specifically improving access to treatment, shifting the balance of care, improving access to health and social care services through digital and technological innovation, and prevention.
Swiney continued to say that expanding Hospital at Home to 2,000 beds by December next year would “create the largest hospital in the country” and improve the flow of patients throughout the NHS and generate greater capacity for staff.
LIVERPOOL LAUNCHES NEUROSCIENCE CENTRE
THE University of Liverpool has opened the Liverpool Interdisciplinary Neuroscience Centre (LINC) – a research hub uniting brain and mind research to tackle urgent neurological, neurosurgical, psychiatric and brain health challenges.
Based at the University of Liverpool, LINC is a strategic partnership with The Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust and Brain Health Northwest, which also includes Mersey Care and Alder Hey Children’s NHS Foundation Trust.
To tackle these challenges, LINC brings together nearly 170 neuroscience researchers and regional clinicians with expertise spanning both brain and mind disciplines.
Their goal is to develop diagnostics, treatments and interventions for a broad range of neurological and psychiatric conditions.
By integrating clinical and behavioural neuroscience, LINC aims to improve health outcomes and enhance quality
of life for individuals affected by these complex disorders.
“This interdisciplinary approach allows us to bridge the gap between neurology, neurosurgery, pain, psychiatry, and psychology, ” said centre director Benedict Michael, professor of neuroscience at the university. “By exploring the complex relationship between brain disease, dysfunction and mental health, LINC will develop pioneering solutions that transform lives.
TRUSTED PROTECTION FOR HEALTHCARE LEADERS
Your strategic partner in clinical risk and protection
From PCNs and corporate providers to consultants in private practice, healthcare organisations face growing pressure to deliver safe, effective care while managing complex risks. MDDUS offers protection that goes beyond defence.
TRUSTED PROTECTION FOR HEALTHCARE LEADERS
When a complaint, claim, or investigation arises, the consequences can be costly – to your reputation, your team, and your patients’ trust.
MDDUS gives you the confidence of fast, expert advice from our in-house medical and legal teams, 24/7.
WHY LEADING PROFESSIONALS AND ORGANISATIONS CHOOSE MDDUS
Comprehensive cover – tailored for PCNs, practices, corporates and consultants.
Real-time support – immediate expert advice.
Always speak to a doctor – in-house medico-legal experts, 24/7.
Support with empathy – advice that recognises the pressures your teams face.
Proactive risk management – tools, training, and content to stay compliant and reduce risk.
Join over 65,000 healthcare professionals and organisations who trust MDDUS to safeguard their team, reputation, and patients.
PHYSICIAN ASSOCIATES
TO BE RENAMED
THE long-running debate about the use of physician associates and anaesthesia associates (PAs and AAs) is over after the government accepted all the recommendations of an independent review into how they are and can be used.
Launched in November 2024, a review chaired by Gillian Leng looked into the safety of the roles of PAs and AAs and how they support wider health teams. She has made 18 recommendations aimed at providing clarity to patients and improving patient safety.
Health and social care secretary Wes Streeting confirmed he would accept all the recommendations and would direct NHS England to write to systems leaders setting out the immediate actions for them to take.
Resident doctors have raised concerns about the safety and lack of clarity for PA and AA roles.
“We’re accepting all of the recommendations of the Leng review, which will provide clarity for the public and make sure we’ve got the right staff, in the right place, doing the right thing. Patients can be confident that those who treat them are qualified to do so,” said Streeting.
PAs will in future be identified as physician assistants and AAs will be renamed as physician assistants in anaesthesia, to reflect their role as supportive members of medical teams. They will also not be able to treat undiagnosed patients, except within clearly defined cases.
Permanent faculties will be established to provide professional leadership and set standards for
physician assistants and physician assistants in anaesthesia. They will also form part of a clear team structure – led by a senior clinicianwhere everyone is aware of their roles, responsibilities and accountability.
Doctors will receive training in line management and leadership, ensuring they can properly fulfil their supervisory roles.
“Now it’s time to focus on delivery: bringing clarity for patients, complementarity between doctors and assistant roles, collaboration across teams, focused on ensuring safe and effective high-quality care,” said Leng.
The British Medical Association called the recommendations of the review “helpful”.
“It is good to see that our longstanding call to change the job title to “assistant” has been listened to. It should not have needed a report like this to tell NHS leaders that the title “physician associate” is confusing and misleading
for patients,” said BMA’s chair of council Tom Dolphin.
Similarly Hilary Williams, incoming clinical vice president at the Royal College of Physicians, welcomed the proposals made in the report. “This report is very clear that reform is urgently needed to ensure safe multiprofessional team-working in the NHS, and we welcome a strong focus on national consistency, patient safety, collaboration and clarity of role and scope,” she said.
It was left to trade union general secretary Stephen Nash of United Medical Associate Professionals to sound a note of caution that the recommendations could limit rather than increase patients’ access to care. He took issue with the fact that PAs will not be able to treat undiagnosed patients. “We believe this will only compound the backlog for appointments with GPs and consultants and entirely negates the benefit of having such highly trained medical professionals available on wards and in local surgeries,” he said.
I’m a consultant and...
I faced an inquest without support from my trust
Two weeks after undertaking a total knee replacement, I was shocked to learn that my patient had died after developing bilateral DVTs and a pulmonary embolism.
It was during the strikes, so I’d written the discharge letter myself. I omitted to provide low molecular weight heparin, and the ward pharmacist didn’t spot the error. Compounding this, against advice, the patient had not worn compression stockings at home.
After I received a complaint from my patient’s wife, my trust opened a Patient Safety Incident Investigation (PSII). This was followed by a coroner’s inquest – which the trust couldn’t support me with due to a conflict of interest. Then, because the coroner referenced my mistake in their conclusion, I faced a GMC investigation.
I can’t describe how awful that year was. Thankfully, my medicolegal consultant and solicitor from Medical Protection had a clear strategy that included legal rigour, supportive expert evidence, and early reflection and remediation. I was able to show that I’d learned from the experience, and to my immense relief the GMC closed the investigation with no further action. Throughout it all, my Medical Protection team were there for me, not only as a doctor, but also as a human being. When you’re at rock bottom, that’s the most important thing of all.
NEGLIGENCE IN A&E COSTS NHS £500 MILLION
SINCE 2019, NHS Trusts have had to pay out more than £500 million to patients who have lodged claims following negligence in an A&E setting.
Figures obtained by Medical Negligence Assist found that between 2019 and 2024, 5,835 claims regarding A&E negligence were lodged against NHS Trusts, with 3,869 of these claims being settled.
As Healthcare Today reported earlier this year, NHS staff experienced the busiest year on record for A&E and ambulance services last year.
The lowest number of claims was made in 2020/21, when 1,019 claims were filed against the trusts. A year later, this number increased to 1,115 claims. Trusts have seen a rise in the number of claims over the past year, compared to 2022/23, with a total of 1,298.
“The growing rate of negligence in A&E services brings into sharp focus a concerning trend within our National Health Service,” said Sophie Cope, a solicitor at JF Law.
“With over 6,000 claims being made against trusts in the past five years, this represents thousands of individuals who have suffered harm at a time when they were most vulnerable and seeking urgent care,” she continued.
Over the past five years, the trusts have paid out a total of £501.3 million, with the highest amount being paid in 2021/22, at £118.5 million. A drastic rise in patient waiting times has also piled pressure on A&E services, with thousands of patients having to wait up to three days, often spending much of that time in hospital corridors. Analysis by the Royal College of Emergency Medicine (RCEM) shows that there were more than 16,600 deaths associated with long A&E
waits before admission in England last year. That’s an increase of 20% (2,725) compared to 2023.
Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust had the highest compensation costs at more than £19 million, while Frimley Health, University Hospitals Birmingham and Northern Care Alliance NHS Trusts also had costs of over £16 million.
The main reason for many claims made against the NHS was a failed or delayed diagnosis, which was responsible for 2,224 claims alone over the past five years.
“The most common reason for individuals pursuing this type of claim has been a failed or delayed diagnosis, often caused by the A&E department’s failure to refer the patient for further investigations. Early intervention and accurate assessment are crucial in an emergency department setting,” said Cope.
ANTICIPATING THE END OF LIFE
THE Royal College of Physicians (RCP) has launched a policy position on end-of-life and palliative care, calling on government and health system leaders to transform how dying is recognised and supported across the NHS and social care.
It calls for a cultural shift – both within healthcare and wider society – towards more open conversations, earlier planning and better integrated care for people with progressive life-limiting conditions. It highlights the urgent need to move beyond a curative mindset to one that embraces personalised, anticipatory approaches to care.
“Doctors of all career grades and specialities need the skills – and, vitally, the time – to recognise when a person is approaching the end of their life,” said RCP clinical vice president Hilary Williams. ‘Too often, that recognition happens only in the final days or weeks, and often in acute care settings. We can and must do better.”
The position statement highlights that 70% of people die from conditions with predictable trajectories. Yet many patients approaching the end of their life are cared for in emergency departments or hospital corridors – settings illsuited to sensitive, dignified care.
The RCP also recognises the vital role of generalist physicians in delivering end-of-life care, supported by specialist palliative services that are currently overstretched and unevenly available. It argues for better information sharing, aligned funding and multidisciplinary training across both health and social care. The RCP has called on the government to launch a public awareness campaign about end-of-life and palliative care; fund professional education and improvement to support better endof-life care planning and delivery;
and commission a national strategy, including a service framework, common dataset and aligned workforce planning.
“As treatment options expand, knowing when to start or stop an intervention, when to investigate or when to focus on quality of life, is becoming more complex,” Williams added. “After all, anticipating the end of life is an act of clinical courage and kindness. These are hard-won skills rooted in expertise and experience – the system must learn to value them.”
REGULATORS TO SPEED UP MEDICINE AUTHORISATION
Under a joint information sharing agreement, pharmaceutical companies will be invited to register early with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to allow parallel decision-making over licensing and value.
This means that patients should receive medicines up to six months faster.
The enhanced coordinated approach offers medicine developers an integrated advice service and an aligned pathway to help them streamline both regulatory and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) requirements and provides a clearer route to help get their treatments to patients.
“Streamlining approval processes will allow both agencies to give patients earlier and equitable access to the
innovative medicines needed to improve UK health outcomes,” said Richard Torbett, chief executive of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry.
To benefit from this service, companies should register their products on UK PharmaScan, the national horizon scanning database, at least three years before their expected marketing authorisation.
TMLEP APPOINTS NEW CEO
TMLEP has appointed Martin Dew as chief executive officer to succeed Oliver Maughan, who is stepping down after more than a decade. Dew’s appointment will reinforce TMLEP’s commitment to building resilience within healthcare providers, proactively driving improvements in patient safety and clinical outcomes, and positioning the company as a global leader in specialist healthcare consultancy and risk management services.
Under Maughan, TMLEP has transformed the investigation of clinical incidents, significantly enhancing how insurers, legal teams, and healthcare providers resolve liabilities with greater speed, accuracy, and efficiency. He has placed TMLEP on the path toward becoming a hyper-specialist healthcare consultancy, extending its expertise beyond clinical liabilities to proactive, reactive, and preventative clinical risk management.
Software. Throughout his career, including his previous role at OneAdvanced, he has championed technology solutions to enhance healthcare delivery and workforce support.
“It’s a privilege to join TMLEP at such a pivotal time,” said Dew. “The company is uniquely positioned to extend its consultancy and real-time response services globally, helping healthcare providers proactively manage clinical risk, adopt cutting-edge technologies, and improve patient outcomes.”
exceptional team and fostered a culture of innovation, creating a robust platform that’s now perfectly positioned for rapid global expansion into healthcare consultancy and clinical risk management,” said Maughan.
Dew joins TMLEP from healthcare technology and workforce software system developer RLDatix & Allocate RETIREMENT villages developers and operators Elysian Residences and Audley Group have merged to create the largest retirement village provider in the UK.
“Together with outstanding colleagues and key partners, we’ve built an
“Martin has exactly the right expertise, ambition, and energy to lead TMLEP successfully through its next phase, scaling services globally to drive resilience within healthcare providers – ensuring clinical risks are managed effectively, and wherever adverse incidents occur, standards of care and patient safety are continuously improved.”
ELYSIAN RESIDENCES AND AUDLEY GROUP TO MERGE
The combined group will have a combined sales value of more than £3 billion, with more than 30 villages, both operating and in the pipeline, representing some 3000 individual properties. The merger was completed with external investment from institutional funds, which have not been named.
“Investors have recognised the benefits of the long-term secure
income stream that retirement villages offer. Now is the right time to capitalise on that interest and bring together aligned brands to create more operating villages,” said Nick Sanderson, chief executive and founder of Audley Group.
The merger brings together three retirement village brands, Elysian, Audley Villages and Mayfield Villages.
The opportunity is significant. Savills recently reported that owneroccupiers aged 65 and over hold £2.6 trillion of net housing wealth. In 2024, the pipeline of retirement housing in
the UK reached just 30,000 homes, falling short of the 50,000 a year needed to meet the demand in the sector.
£1.25 billion was invested and committed to the retirement housing market last year, with investment expected to increase in 2025, according to the Knight Frank UK Seniors Housing Market Update in June.
The three village brands will sit under a new corporate group, which will be led by Gavin Stein, chief executive and founder of Elysian Residences, while Sanderson is chairman of the group.
CONCERNS OVER MATERNITY SERVICES AT LEEDS HOSPITALS
A REVIEW of maternity services at Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust has issued more than 100 recommendations for improvement.
Concerns about maternity and neonatal services at Leeds General Infirmary and St James’s University Hospital have grown since an unannounced inspection by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in December and January.
As Healthcare Today reported in January, there were at least 56 cases of stillbirths or neonatal deaths, as well as two maternity deaths between January 2019 and July 2024.
The result of this was that NHS England’s Maternity Safety Support Programme (MSSP) team visited the Trust between 17 and 20 March this year.
“The culture of the organisation was challenging and came across as a degree of negativity rather than supportive, with lack of communication being a theme through all the staff meetings and a feeling of ‘being done to’. This had led to escalation fatigue from the staff as they did not feel that their safety concerns were listened or responded to in a productive and supportive way,” was one of the report’s conclusions.
The report outlines 101 recommendations to address safety, staffing, leadership and cultural issues across the Trust’s maternity units at Leeds General Infirmary and St James’s Hospital.
As well as the culture of the organisation, the report said that the service has had a challenge in responding to families who have experienced harm and poor outcomes.
The systems and processes in relation to the governance framework in maternity and the wider organisation could also be strengthened with little sense that the Trust was learning from incidents. “Not robust” is how the report characterises it.
The report team is damning in its detail and range from “the Trust could benefit from reviewing and outlining key roles and responsibilities for the senior midwifery team to provide a higher level of assurance,” and “the Trust would benefit having a quarterly review of recruitment and retention performance to maintain oversight of attrition rates and which may enable earlier intervention,” to “The Trust would benefit from some focused cultural work and support form ward to board to ensure that leaders and staff feel psychologically safe to raise concerns that will be listened to and supported”.
Leeds General Infirmary
The Trust said it wanted to be “open and honest” about the reviews and the changes that it is making. It also emphasised that it has begun to implement “a comprehensive improvement plan”, working with the CQC and NHS England.
The most obvious change is that a new independent chair has been appointed to lead the maternity and neonatal improvement programme board in Leeds. Birte Harlev-Lam, executive director midwife at the Royal College of Midwives, was named at the end of July.
Many still remain to be convinced. “While we welcome the Trust’s pledge to improve maternity safety, this must now be matched by action. Management needs to ensure staff are supported at all times so they can uphold the highest level of care,” said Rachelle Mahapatra, partner specialising in medical negligence law at Irwin Mitchell’s Leeds office.
Trusted by Clinicians, Chosen by Patients
Located in the Harley Street Health District, Pharmacierge supports over 4,500 GPs and Consultants with seamless, secure e-Prescribing apps tailored for private practitioners.
With our state-of-the-art robotically enabled dispensary and nationwide delivery, we ensure your patients receive their medications promptly, while you prescribe with confidence - anytime, anywhere.
mPrescribe®
Revolutionises private prescribing by allowing you to prescribe flexibly without a laptop, for delivery to your patients nationwide.
Medication range
Due to the range of specialists we support, we stock and source medication not typically found outside of a hospital setting, including refrigerated, controlled, injectable and biologic medication.
Courier delivery
We include same weekday delivery to London postcodes, or next weekday nationally as standard. International deliveries are also available.
"Your mobile app changed my life!" — Dr Dominic Paviour, Consultant Neurologist "Intuitive and secure." — Dr Tim Wigmore, Consultant Intensivist & Anaesthetist
Join thousands of clinicians today. Download the app and register online www.pharmacierge.com/register
TIME TO REGULATE THE MANAGERS
COMPLAINTS about managers at the NHS – as opposed to doctors – are legion. As Sandesh Gulhane, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party’s spokesperson for health and social care, pointed out to Healthcare Today in June: “We could look at virtually every scandal in the NHS, and the pattern is the same: not one manager has ever been held accountable”.
The problem has been that tens of thousands of clinical and non-clinical managers work in the NHS, but there is currently no regulatory framework specifically for managers, like there is for doctors and nurses.
New proposals set out by the Department of Health and Social Care will mean any manager who silences whistleblowers or behaves unacceptably will be banned from returning to a health service position.
“I’m determined to create a culture of honesty and openness in the NHS where whistleblowers are protected, and that demands tough enforcement. We’ve got to create the conditions where staff are free to come forward and sound the alarm when things go wrong. Protecting the reputation of the NHS should never be put before protecting patient safety,” said Wes Streeting, secretary of state for health and social care.
The new proposals were developed following a public consultation launched in November last year. It received more than 4,900 contributions on ways in which managers and leaders could be regulated.
In response, the government said that it intends to ensure that those who have committed serious misconduct are no longer able to work in senior NHS management positions. The statutory barring system will be for board-level directors and their direct reports within NHS bodies.
“Managers will welcome this new regulatory framework, as part of the broader package of actions set out in the plan to attract, develop and retain the best possible leaders for the NHS of today and tomorrow,” said Sam Allen, NHS national director for leadership and management.
Further legislation will set out new statutory powers for the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) to
disbar NHS leaders in senior roles who have committed serious misconduct. Separate NHS England professional standards for managers will establish a consistent, national set of expectations about NHS management and leadership competency and conduct.
“Along with the ongoing implementation of my other recommendations for improving board competence, this is a positive move to strengthen management in the NHS by weeding out poor leadership. This is good news for whistleblowers and those looking for accountability in senior management, which has long been lacking,” said Tom Kark, author of the Kark Review published in February and which focused on the effectiveness of the Fit and Proper Person Test (FPPT) for NHS board members.
Sector responses to the new proposals were positive and focused on the ways that they would improve patient safety.
“The government’s announcement of the introduction of a statutory barring scheme for NHS leaders in senior roles is an important step forward for patient safety,” said Bernie O’Reilly, chief executive and registrar at the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC), the regulator for a range of health and care professions in the UK.
“As the government’s consultation makes clear, the vast majority of leaders and managers across the NHS work hard every day, making difficult decisions in often challenging circumstances to ensure patients receive safe and effective care. Sadly, there have also been high-profile instances where this has not been the case, and a number of independent reviews have highlighted failures of leadership within the NHS,” he continued.
His comments were echoed by Ben White, Medical Protection Society (MPS) cases team lead, who emphasised that the proposals would improve the safety and quality of patient care.
“Establishing a clear regulatory framework and consistent standards would not only help drive improvement in leadership and management practice but also provide confidence to both patients and healthcare professionals that managers are held to account in a similar way to clinicians,” he said.
AI IDENTIFIES HEART VALVE DEFECTS
RESEARCHERS from London and China have found that artificial intelligence can spot very early changes in the heart’s structure from an ECG, a common test which shows the heart’s electrical activity. This could help to predict which patients might develop significant heart problems years in advance, just based on ECG readings.
The advanced algorithm can detect issues in the heart’s valves – which keep blood flowing in the correct direction through the heart’s chambers – even before the appearance of symptoms or physical changes that can be detected by ultrasound scans. The AI could accurately predict who would go on to develop significant leaks in the heart’s mitral, tricuspid or aortic valves – conditions known as regurgitant valvular heart diseases. It was able to correctly identify the risk of a leaky heart valve in the years following the ECG (from high to low) in around 69-79% of cases.
“Our work is harnessing AI to detect subtle changes at the earliest stage
from a simple and common test, and we think this could be really transformative for doctors and patients,” said Arunashis Sau, a cardiology registrar at Imperial College Healthcare and Academic Clinical Lecturer at Imperial College London.
It’s estimated 1.5 million people in the UK live with heart valve diseases, which can lead to heart failure, hospital admissions and death. Early diagnosis is key to successful treatment. But the symptoms, which include shortness of breath, dizziness, tiredness and heart palpitations, can be easily confused with other causes, while some patients don’t show any symptoms until the disease is advanced.
The study was part of an international collaboration involving researchers in China, based at Shanghai’s Zhongshan Hospital. AI models were trained using nearly one million ECG and heart ultrasound (echocardiogram) records from more than 400,000 patients in China. The technology was then tested on a separate group of more than 34,000 patients in the US, showing that it works well across ethnically diverse populations and healthcare systems.
This research was funded by the British Heart Foundation and supported by the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre, a translational research partnership between Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust and Imperial College London, which was awarded £95 million in 2022 to continue developing new experimental treatments and diagnostics for patients.
The team’s findings have just been published in The European Heart Journal
HOSPICES RECEIVE £75 MILLION FUNDING
THE government has released £75 million to modernise facilities and deliver upgrades to hospices across England. This comes as part of its £100 million of capital funding, spread over two years, to help hospices provide the best end-of-life care.
The initial £25 million was released in March. The government announced the £100 million of capital funding in December. More than 170 hospices across England will receive a share of the funding to ensure patients receive the highest-quality end-of-life care in dignified surroundings.
“Hospices play a vital role in our society by providing invaluable care and support when people need it
most,” said minister for care Stephen Kinnock. “End-of-life care is crucial to our 10 Year Health Plan and our fundamental shift of moving more care out of hospital and into the community. We will continue to support hospices so they can deliver their vital work.”
The new cash injection is for the financial year 2025 to 2026 and will be distributed by Hospice UK to hospices. Hospices have been allocated a pot of funding and will be able to proceed with upgrades, invoicing Hospice UK once work has been completed.
Improvements already made at hospices across the country include
major building works and modernised facilities, digital transformation to improve data sharing between healthcare providers, the development of outreach services to extend care beyond physical buildings and the creation of more welcoming spaces for families, including outdoor areas as well as energy efficiency measures to improve sustainability.
“We were pleased to distribute the first £25 million of this funding early in March. We know this money has made a huge difference to hospices, and the next £75 million will continue to help them invest in their buildings, facilities and digital infrastructure,” said Toby Porter, chief executive of Hospice UK.
GOVERNMENT LAUNCHES LIFE SCIENCES SECTOR PLAN
THE government has launched a new Life Sciences Sector Plan as part of the government’s industrial strategy, setting out a ten-year mission to harness British science and innovation to deliver economic growth and a stronger, prevention-focused NHS.
The life sciences sector in the UK is worth around £100 billion to the economy, and employs around 300,000 people.
The plan, developed in coordination with the government’s 10 Year Health Plan, sets out a roadmap built around three pillars: strengthening the UK’s leadership in science and discovery; growing homegrown companies and attracting global capital; and delivering better outcomes for patients.
The plan builds on the chancellor’s commitment to reduce regulatory costs by a quarter, with increased investment in the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). It aims to streamline medtech market entry through closer coordination between the MHRA and NICE.
“The life sciences sector is one of the crown jewels of the UK economy. It sits at the heart of both our Plan for Change, and our modern industrial strategy, as a unique catalyst for both economic prosperity, and better health outcomes for people across the UK,” said science and technology secretary Peter Kyle.
Sign of the government’s commitment to the plan came with the appointment in late July of Steve Bates as executive chair for the office for life sciences.
The former chief executive of the BioIndustry Association will report directly into the Jonathan Reynolds,
the business secretary, as well as to health secretary Wes Streeting and technology secretary Peter Kyle.
In his role, Bates will act as an ambassador both domestically and internationally for the UK life sciences sector. He will work across government and the wider public sector to ensure engagement with industry around policy and investment.
The Life Science Sector Plan has been welcomed by many in the industry.
MHRA chief executive Lawrence Tallon said that he fully supported its ambition to make the UK a global leader in life sciences.
“It’s great to see the MHRA is recognised as a pivotal partner in delivering the plan’s vision - by supporting innovation, protecting public health, and making the UK a global destination for innovators to research, develop and launch cuttingedge medical products,” he said.
Similarly, Nick Lansman founder and chief executive of innovation coalition the Health Tech Alliance, called the plan a “decisive step forward” for the country’s health tech industry.
“The focus on streamlining regulation, improving data access and investing in regional health innovation clusters will help position the UK as a global leader in life sciences,” he said.
A less self-congratulatory note was sounded by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) which is warning that the core ambition of the government’s new life sciences strategy will not be realised unless it makes a real commitment to invest more in new medicines.
“This plan recognises both the extraordinary contributions of the life sciences sector to the UK, and the fact that in recent years, it has been struggling to remain competitive and attractive to investment. The solutions proposed are necessary and important, but they are not enough to turn around the UK’s decline,” said ABPI chief executive Richard Torbett.
“The UK must address the core issue holding back the life sciences sector, the long-term disinvestment in innovative medicines that is increasingly preventing NHS patients from accessing medications that are available in other countries,” he continued.
He took aim specifically at the Voluntary Scheme for Branded Medicines Pricing, Access, and Growth, also known as VPAG. Payment rates under the scheme now sit at between a quarter to a third of a company’s revenue from sales of branded medicines to the NHS. This is, he says, undermining efforts to make life sciences a key pillar of its industrial strategy.
“Without change, the UK will continue the slow slide down international league tables for research, investment, and the availability of new medicines,” he concluded.
Providing first class medical consulting and therapy rooms at prime locations in Central London and Liverpool
London
tenharleystreet.co.uk 020 7467 8300
Liverpool eightyeightrodneystreet.co.uk 0151 709 7066
Harley-quarter-ad-60x100.indd 1
NHS TO USE AI TO STOP PATIENT SAFETY SCANDALS
STARTING with maternity care in November, AI technology will be developed to scan NHS systems to flag safety issues and trigger crucial inspections.
The new safety warning system, being developed as part of the government’s 10 Year Health Plan, will analyse healthcare data and ring the alarm bell on emerging safety issues.
A new maternity outcomes signal system will launch across NHS trusts from November, using near realtime data to flag higher than expected rates of stillbirth, neonatal death and brain injury. When fully implemented, it could analyse hospital databases to identify patterns of abuse, serious injuries, deaths or other incidents. Where concerns are raised, the Care Quality Commission (CQC) will deploy specialist inspection teams to take action.
“This technology will save lives – catching unsafe care before it becomes a tragedy. It’s a vital part of our commitment to move the NHS from analogue to digital, delivering better, safer care for everyone,” said health and social care secretary Wes Streeting.
13/10/2016 11:08
The adoption of the AI warning system is underpinned by the government’s transformation of the NHS – one of the three shifts outlined in the 10 Year Health Plan.
“The NHS in England will be the first country in the world to trial an AI-enabled warning system, which will rapidly analyse routine hospital data and reports submitted by healthcare staff from community settings,” explained Meghana Pandit, co-national medical director – secondary care, NHS England.
The system is built on the NHS Federated Data Platform, which allows healthcare staff to securely access the information they need in one place. That means less paperwork and manual inspections for staff, and more time caring for patients.
“We are already developing our new clearer, simpler assessment approach, and in the future our experienced teams of inspectors, led by our newly appointed chief inspectors, will be able to conduct more inspections and share feedback on the findings more quickly - so that providers can make faster improvements, and the public have timely information about care,” said Julian Hartley, chief executive of the CQC.
MATERNITY SERVICES IN SWANSEA SLAMMED
THE independent report into maternity services at Swansea Bay University Health Board has been excoriating, leading to a public apology from the chair and chief executive of the board, a written statement in the Senedd and promises of a national assessment of all maternity and neonatal services in Wales.
Commissioned in December 2023 and appearing off the back of a number of reports into maternity care in the area, the report highlights unacceptable patient and family experiences, problems with racism, staffing, training and resources, as well as environmental and safety concerns.
In an open letter to Swansea Bay residents, Jan Williams and Abi Harris, chair and chief executive of the board, accepted all of the report’s findings and recommendations.
“A core and key lesson for us as an organisation is that we haven’t listened enough to women and their families – they’ve been telling us about their experiences at the time and afterwards and the hard truth is that we haven’t listened or acted on a consistent enough basis,” they said.
The report, which was chaired by Denise Chaffer, recently retired director of safety and learning for NHS Resolution, makes for difficult reading.
“The clinical review team identified a significant number of inconsistencies in the quality and effectiveness of the care provided across both maternity and neonatal services,” the report says. Between 2021 and 2024, there were low and inconsistent staffing levels (predominantly for
midwifery staff), and low compliance with mandatory training, it found. And over the same period, there were “significant weaknesses in governance”. Above it, the report said that the board has “not always been kind and compassionate to women and families, particularly when things have gone wrong and people want to raise concerns”.
Following its findings, the report has made ten priority recommendations. These include establishing a single point of access for maternity triage for all women, the delivery of consistent care with senior clinical staff oversight and the implementation of Maternity Early Warning Scores. At the same time, it is recommended that the board improve the quality of investigations, its governance and deliver more compassionate care. It is a sign of how serious the problem has been that the report recommends that the board be reassessed within six months.
Responding to the report, Williams admitted that its findings were “unacceptable and distressing” and in the Senned, health and social care secretary Jeremy Miles offered “a full and unreserved apology on behalf of the Welsh Government to all the
women and families who have not received the service or care they deserved and expected from Swansea Bay University Health Board”.
He also announced a national assessment of all maternity and neonatal services in Wales. This assessment will be independently chaired and will take account of the findings of the recent reviews of maternity and neonatal services across the UK, including in Swansea Bay.
“NHS maternity and neonatal services must learn from what has happened in Swansea Bay. Together, we must commit to delivering the best possible experiences and outcomes for all women during pregnancy and birth,” he said.
The assessment will also align with the England-wide review.
As Healthcare Today reported in June, the NHS Providers’ report set out the worries of NHS Trusts about the quality and safety of care as demand rises amid reduced resources and the knock-on effect of deep-rooted problems in access and equality elsewhere in the health system.
HEALTH PLAN MOVES FOCUS ONTO COMMUNITIES
NORTHERN Ireland
health minister Mike Nesbitt has committed to establishing a neighbourhood-centred system of health and social care, bringing more services closer to communities.
The shift from hospital to community care echoes the British government’s 10 Year Health Plan, which was published in early July.
What is called the Health and Social Care Reset plan also sets out measures to counter unprecedented financial pressures, with a projected £600 million gap between available funding and the cost of maintaining existing services this year.
As Nesbitt told Healthcare Today in April: “The fundamental issue we face is that the health service now consumes just over 50% of the Northern Ireland Executive’s budget. Yet, when assessed against objective need, we actually need slightly more – a case that has proven exceedingly difficult to argue within a four-party mandatory coalition.”
The reset plan intends to build on the themes in the three-year strategic plan published by the minister in December last year: Stabilisation, Reform and Delivery.
The plan has seven priorities which include investing in primary care, community care and social care; delivering mental, physical and social healthcare in a joined-up way, and exploiting opportunities for research, supporting early adoption of new medical procedures and treatments; with the opportunity to attract the inward investment this brings.
Other priorities include adopting a whole systems approach to optimise the whole of Northern Ireland’s health and care workforce; maximising digital investment and the strategic use of data; as well as a number of what are normally called softer priorities, such as a focus on being effective and efficient with the resources available.
“This neighbourhood approach will help tackle health inequalities, and support individuals to look after their own health and well-being, while recognising that health interventions are only one element to improving well-being. Of equal importance are employment, housing, education and other important services delivered across government,” Nesbitt said.
“The reset plan represents the next steps in the outworking of my three-year strategic plan for health and social care, recognising that progress has been constrained by financial pressures,” he continued.
The plan is designed to achieve £300 million in savings in this financial year on top of the £200 million saved last year.
Nesbitt’s plan has been welcomed
by the British Medical Association (BMA).
“This ambitious plan is consistent with every other reform and transformation plan over the last two decades. The minister is entirely correct that this is a watershed year for the NHS. It is long past time for proper action to save our health and social care services, which need whole system change, and ensuring we have staff and resources where we want our patients – close to home,” said chair of the BMA’s Northern Ireland council Alan Stout.
He warned, however, that it would be a challenge to deliver any of these commitments without engaging with doctors.
“A new neighbourhood model of care simply will not happen without first resolving the dispute with GP partners over the 2025/26 GMS contract as a matter of urgent priority,” he said.
In July, GPs partners in Northern Ireland voted overwhelmingly in favour of taking collective action for a better contract offer, which saw a turnout of 79.4% with 98.7% in favour of action.
Northern Ireland health minister Mike Nesbitt
GOVERNMENT CRACKS DOWN ON COSMETIC PROCEDURES
THE government has said that it intends to introduce new measures to crack down on unsafe cosmetic procedures to protect the public. The planned crackdown follows a series of incidents where people have had high-risk treatments from people with little or no medical training. This has led to dangerous complications.
The new measures follow growing alarm over unqualified individuals performing invasive treatments in unsafe environments – including homes, hotels and pop-up clinics. Many of these procedures are marketed as non-surgical but, in reality, are invasive and carry serious risks.
Only qualified healthcare professionals will be able to perform the highest-risk procedures – such as non-surgical Brazilian butt lifts. These must be done by specialised healthcare workers working in providers that are registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).
“The cosmetics industry has been plagued by a Wild West of dodgy practitioners and procedures. There are countless horror stories of cosmetic cowboys causing serious, catastrophic damage,” said minister of state for health Karin Smyth.
“This isn’t about stopping anyone from getting treatments – it’s about preventing rogue operators from exploiting people at the expense of their safety and keeping people safe,” she continued.
Other lower-risk cosmetic treatments – including Botox, lip fillers and facial dermal fillers – will also come under stricter oversight through a new local authority licensing system.
Practitioners will be required to meet safety, training and insurance standards before they can legally operate. Once regulations are introduced, practitioners who break the rules on the highest-risk procedures will be subject to CQC enforcement and financial penalties. The government also plans to bring in restrictions for under-18s on high-risk cosmetic procedures, unless authorised by a healthcare professional.
Priority will be given to introducing regulations to restrict the highestrisk procedures first - such as fillers injected into breasts and genitals. A public consultation will be published early next year. This will seek views on the range of procedures which should be covered in the restrictions.
“Any measures that increase protection for the general public and professionalise the industry will help instil confidence as well as helping to prevent the normalisation of horror stories that have become synonymous with our sector,” said Millie Kendall, chief executive officer at the British Beauty Council.
Christian Carr at law firm Spencer West in Manchester agreed that
there was surprise and confusion on the part of members of the public about the lack of regulatory monitoring and control of the people and places offering these services. “Unsafe assumptions have often been made about the training and qualifications of those offering the services,” he said.
“Regulated professionals and provider organisations can also be expected to regard them favourably, as filling these gaps will ultimately serve to protect and enhance their reputations for delivering skilful, ethical, safe care,” he continued.
The new regulations will be subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before they are introduced and follow a consultation on the licensing of non-surgical cosmetic procedures launched in September 2023, which received almost 12,000 responses.
The government has said that it will also work closely with stakeholders to develop further proposals for consultation on introducing the licensing regime for lowerrisk procedures to seek views on education, training standards, qualifications, infection control and insurance.
“The introduction of standards to ensure that patients are safeguarded and protected from harm, ensuring that all cosmetic practitioners are regulated and licensed to a new national education and training standard, that they are appropriately insured and that they work from safe premises at all times has become imperative,” said David Sines, executive chair and registrar at the Joint Council for Cosmetic Practitioners (JCCP), confirming that the proposals had his full support.
PENNY DASH REFRAMING CULTURE
APPOINTED chair of NHS England in March, Penny Dash is a former hospital doctor and partner at McKinsey, where she led the management consultancy’s healthcare practice across Europe.
Few understand the healthcare landscape in England as well as she does. She is perhaps best known for leading two independent reviews commissioned by the government into the operational effectiveness of the Care Quality Commission (CQC) late last year and into patient safety this year.
Here, she talks to Healthcare Today about patient safety and effectiveness, how to achieve change in the NHS and how to rebuild trust with the public.
It’s getting on for a month since the Dash Review was published. The dust has settled. Do you think patient safety is being taken seriously enough at board level across the NHS? And has your work shifted your own perspective on patient safety?
It’s still early days since the report was published, and several of the structural changes I proposed have yet to be implemented. In fact, some of the governance mechanisms we recommended – not only in my report but also in the 10 Year Plan – will take time to put in place. As I said in the Care Quality Commission report and during
The chair of NHS England explains why NHS effectiveness is as important as patient safety and how she intends to rebuild trust with the medical profession and the public.
Written by Adrian Murdoch.
the review process, I was struck by how heavily we’ve leaned towards prioritising patient safety – especially when compared to effectiveness. And underpinning that, I believe, is a lack of recognition of just how significantly different the scale of impact can be.
It is always hard to move bureaucratic organisations. Your recommendations are clear… but do you expect them to be implemented? Will it work?
It’s never going to be easy. The NHS is a vast and, in many ways, quite a disparate organisation. Depending on how you count it, there are around 300 separate entities – Trusts and Integrated Care Boards (ICB) – as well as approximately 10,000 GP practices. It’s not just the sheer scale that presents a challenge, but also the lack of uniformity across the system.
Other large organisations with more than 400 local offices, or even upwards of 10,000, tend to
have a much greater degree of standardisation. They’re typically far better at evaluating different approaches, testing what works and then rolling out what’s deemed to be the best method.
Change on that scale is never easy, but the mechanisms do exist.
I also believe there’s value in holding individual teams and boards to account – not in a punitive sense, but in a constructive one. In many other sectors, people view feedback conversations as useful. In the NHS, though, we’ve tended to see it as performance management, which carries a negative connotation. But really, it should be about honest, open conversation.
That sort of ethos – an open, reflective culture of improvement –isn’t yet embedded in the system. It will take time, but it’s essential.
Streamlining the role of the centre and devolving accountability to local leaders is an admirable idea,
DASH CULTURE
but will this not just widen the gap between good-performing areas and those under pressure?
People do ask that question, and the answer really depends on what role the centre is playing. One could argue that, historically, the centre has been quite large and heavily involved in performance management, often in a negative or punitive way – which hasn’t always been helpful.
What we’re trying to do now is take a bit of a step back, while at the same time making the rules of the game very clear. The idea is that, with clearer expectations, we’re then in a better position to take action when those rules aren’t being followed. It’s not a magic solution, of course, but we hope this approach will encourage more local ownership and improvement.
Healthcare Today has repeatedly written about failings in
We have to take patient experience seriously. And the scale of it is huge and complex.
keeps emerging is that Trusts are not learning from their mistakes. How can that culture shift be accelerated?
That’s a question a lot of us are asking. One of the key things is that we need to get the balance right. We have to take patient experience seriously. And, again, the scale of it is huge and complex.
How do we shift towards seeing complaints as a gift? How do we actively encourage people to give feedback – not necessarily in a way that feels like complaining? One thing I found interesting when we were doing the report was how many people disliked the word “complain”. They said, and I thought this was a brilliant reframing, “We don’t necessarily want to complain –we want to input”.
That struck me as particularly relevant in healthcare. People are often very nervous about complaining. And you can see why – if this is your GP practice, you’re not likely to go anywhere else. That relationship really matters.
The same is true if you’re under a consultant or a hospital team. Most people don’t want to be confrontational – but they do want to say, “This could be better”. That’s the mindset we need to embed. We need to measure patient
now is trying to put much better analysis in front of the political team, in front of ministers. If we can get stronger analysis and clearer thinking on: What’s the current state of play? Where do we want to get to? And what would it take to get from A to B? – then we can lay out all the things we could do.
And actually, most of it isn’t about politics. Most of it is good management: how do we get from here to there.
And how do you rebuild trust with the public?
First and foremost, we’ve got to deliver. That’s the bottom line. But it’s also important to put some context around what we’re doing –because one of the things we often forget is that we’re dealing with around 300 million contacts a year.
We’ve also got to fix the basics. Primary care is the thing most people interact with, and we have to get that right.
People need to be able to book an appointment online. Most people under the age of 75 are baffled that you can’t. For them, everything else in life is booked online. You look at the 25-year-olds –they don’t even know how to make a phone call. They’ve never used their phone for that. So we’ve got to sort
For me, that’s a de minimis: everyone should be able to make an appointment for everything – easily. These are the basic things we have to fix. Because unless we do, we won’t regain public confidence.
These aren’t huge, complex reforms – we’re talking about the basics. The basics of good communication. And the good news is we’re incredibly lucky: we live in a world with the digital tools to make this entirely doable.
MORE than a quarter of adults in England are living with obesity. New interventions are urgently needed to scale back this crisis and its wider implications on national health.
The NHS’s recent GP rollout of Mounjaro is a pivotal moment; coupled with the strong focus on obesity in the government’s 10 Year Health Plan, it has the potential to improve weight management in the UK significantly. However, the GP rollout only applies to a limited cohort of patients, and will only go so far in granting access to all those who need it.
This is a positive first step, and the potential for transformative change is clear. This can only be realised if the rollout is matched by adequate support for specialists delivering care.
Combining this change with digital support is the way forward, enabling the comprehensive, wraparound care required for patients to achieve effective weight loss. Focusing on a holistic approach to treatment is vital here if this investment by the NHS is to be used effectively.
NHS readiness for weight loss medication rollout
While the NHS’s rollout of Mounjaro through GPs is the most tangible action to date, recent data from Juniper surveying NHS GPs, NHS nurse prescribers and NHS pharmacists, makes clear that the NHS is not yet fully prepared to provide the wraparound care and ongoing monitoring required to make this a meaningful change.
94% of respondents are concerned about the NHS’s ability to provide safe, ongoing care for patients prescribed GLP-1 weight loss medications, citing pressures on resources and monitoring capacity.
THE MISSING OBESITY MANAGEMENT
This is despite 98% of respondents believing GLP-1s are a safe and effective treatment option for eligible patients, but only when prescribed and monitored safely. Despite the rollout, the NHS is only in a position to offer proper care to a limited cohort of patients. With approval from specialists, and the established view that weight loss drugs like Mounjaro are effective in reducing obesity - success hinges on the NHS’s ability to develop this wraparound care framework.
Ongoing wraparound care is critical to long-term weight loss success
Obesity is not a one-stop fix. It requires ongoing support if sustainable results are to be
Kevin Joshua, clinical lead why holistic support is GP rollout of
achieved. The most obvious barrier to a successful obesity strategy, therefore, lies in the provision of essential wraparound support needed for long-term success.
This support, which includes regular, ongoing check-ins, nutritional advice, psychological support, as well as tailored exercise programmes, is central to a holistic weight loss journey. 100% of respondents believe additional support services are important alongside a GLP-1 medication prescription. To add, 33% believe medication won’t be
MISSING PIECE IN MANAGEMENT
lead at Juniper, explains critical for an effective of Mounjaro.
effective without wraparound care services and 86% say patients may discontinue treatment without this support. The nature of obesity requires long-term supportreducing the number of those living with this disease relies on delivering this care.
Digital tools and telehealth are seen as the solution
Among healthcare professionals, 87% believe digital tools such as telehealth and digital health apps
could improve the safety and scalability of GLP-1 medication rollouts. The rollout of digital health support such as remote health monitoring, educational support, patient health apps and consultations via app or phone is increasingly seen as viable solutions that could alleviate the pressure for those prescribing.
For private weight loss drug providers, delivering this ongoing digital support has been shown to enhance patient outcomes. Frequent check-ins conducted remotely help to provide pastoral support and allow specialists to adjust dosage levels as needed.
Currently, 45% of NHS GPs and pharmacists support a blended
approach in offering initial, faceto-face health appointments, which then move to digital or remote follow-ups.
Concerns, however, remain about offering a hybrid healthcare approach – 38% are concerned about patient digital literacy and accessibility, while 35% worry about data privacy and whether these platforms have adequate cybersecurity in place to mitigate data breaches. It’s clear that for the NHS to achieve real progress, it needs to invest in strong digital infrastructure or integrate with digital providers, to benefit both health specialists and patients alike.
Embracing digital solutions would bring expert-led care to more patients. While other health outlets like gyms and commercial diet programmes somewhat fill the support gap for those improving their health when the NHS falls short, these alternatives cannot guarantee comprehensive medical oversight and support, which is important when medication is added to the equation. This means patients may not receive adequate care and risk regaining weight.
The rollout of Mounjaro is a turning point, but many measures must be taken if this is to be effective. By taking steps to pair the medication with ongoing, wraparound care, the NHS can ensure the Mounjaro rollout delivers on its promise and helps more people achieve lasting, healthy lives.
Both patients and clinicians are ready to adopt more hybrid health approaches, paving the way for a multi-pathway approach using digital innovation. The onus is on the NHS to innovate at the same pace as pioneering companies that are delivering effective digital health solutions. Making this a clear priority is essential to ensure no patient is left behind in the fight against obesity.
MARYANN FERREUX: ADDRESSING INEQUALITY WITH SIMPLE SOLUTIONS
The chief medical officer for Health Innovation Kent Surrey Sussex talks about women’s health for all and how to help marginalised communities.
Written by Adrian Murdoch.
HOW to manage health inequalities is MaryAnn Ferreux’s bread and butter and few are more articulate on the reasons for it and how it can be fixed. Here, the chief medical officer for Health Innovation Kent Surrey Sussex and a non-executive director for Kent and Medway NHS Partnership Trust, explains how she works with communities that have historically been underrepresented and why some of the answers are very simple indeed.
Let’s start with your strategic vision at Health Innovation KSS. What are your main priorities for addressing health inequalities across the region?
We began by thinking about equity in its broadest sense. One of our first priorities was developing the first health equity framework for innovation, which was designed to cover a wide range of principles. That included looking closely at data to ensure it reflects the experiences of diverse populations, considering diversity within teams, boards and leadership, and thinking through issues like policy, climate change, and financial sustainability. That work opened our eyes to the bigger role we could – and should – be playing in addressing health inequalities.
One of the first areas we wanted to focus on was women’s health. My view has always been that if we can’t close the gender health gap – and women make up 51% of the population – then we’ve got no chance of improving outcomes for any other marginalised or underserved group. More recently, we’ve expanded our work to support marginalised and underserved communities, including refugees and migrant groups. We partnered with a refugee charity called Nafsiyat to create intercultural awareness training – focused on providing culturally competent and safe care.
Is the message getting through about women’s health?
Things are changing – slowly. Women do live, on average, up to ten years longer than men, but often in poorer health. There are a lot of cultural issues tied up with women’s health.
As women, we also haven’t always talked openly within our social groups about some of the issues that are now starting to come out into the open. These days, we’re having conversations about pelvic pain, about perimenopause and its symptoms, about domestic violence and about the challenges of parenting. But it’s not happening fast enough. The scale of the problem in women’s health is just so vast, it can feel overwhelming at times.
A lot of our work now is centred on advocacy to help promote what we’re doing in women’s health and to address those inequalities. But it’s not something that will change
We’ve expanded support marginalised underserved communities, including refugees migrant groups.
overnight. There’s a huge amount of work that we all need to contribute to, collectively.
development of their innovations. But there’s no point designing something, launching a solution, and only then having someone like me come along and say: “Have you thought about how Black and brown communities might use this?” We’ve seen innovations that literally don’t work on darker skin tones. This stuff has to be thought about from the start, especially in a population as diverse as the UK’s.
The uptake of the toolkit has been brilliant – more than 4,000 innovators have downloaded it. And that actually prompted us to create another version, this time for commissioners.
Much of the innovation landscape is digital. But digital exclusion remains a challenge. How do you make sure that people aren’t left behind?
expanded our work to marginalised and communities, refugees and groups.
You’ve said that innovation must serve everyone. How do you ensure new technologies and models of care don’t just widen existing inequalities?
That’s something that’s been really important to us. One of the ways we tackled that was by creating an innovative toolkit – a practical way of translating the principles of the framework into real-world application.
The idea is that anyone – whether it’s a well-established company or just someone with a new idea – can use the toolkit to guide themselves through an assessment and a set of scenario-based questions. We’ve supported the toolkit with a series of webinars as well, providing additional mentoring and support to help individuals and organisations build equity into the design and
It really depends on the nature of the innovation – but equity is always part of the conversation in our toolkit. We try to be realistic. The toolkit acknowledges that there might be questions you can’t answer, or areas where we can’t do anything. And that’s okay – because the essence of equity is that you’ve at least thought about it.
Where we see things go wrong is when equity hasn’t been considered at all.
I once had a conversation with a woman from a Bangladeshi community about breast cancer screening. She told me that Bangladeshi women don’t get breast cancer. She explained that the posters and flyers were all aimed at older white women – so the unspoken message was that breast cancer doesn’t affect Bangladeshi women. That kind of oversight, unintentional as it may be, could mean women from that community are less likely to come forward for screening. Something as simple as the imagery we use can have a huge impact.
How do you work with communities that have historically been underrepresented in research and service design?
We’re really fortunate in our Health Innovation Network to have both a population health team and a dedicated Patient and Community Involvement and Engagement (PCIE) team. Because we’re involved in translational research, we focus on uncovering real-world insights, often through qualitative methods like interviews and focus groups. That means we’ve built strong, lasting connections with communities.
One recent example is a women’s health report we produced for the Sussex Integrated Care Board. We made a point of reaching out to women whose views aren’t typically captured. We ran focus groups with Black and minority ethnic women, women with autism or learning disabilities, and older women – exploring their experiences of health and healthcare across the life course. We also spoke with teenage girls and young women to understand what they want from the healthcare system.
Gathering these insights is only the first step. We then have the opportunity to publish our findings, to work with other system partners and to share what we’ve learned so that we can better understand the problems people are facing and start designing the solutions they actually need.
What gaps do you see in current research or innovation efforts?
There are some immediate, acute gaps in the system – and those are the things that worry me, particularly from what I hear at board level. I regularly hear about patients being bounced around the system.
I also worry deeply about people in rural and coastal communities, and their ability physically to access care.
Getting to bigger towns might be just a 15-minute drive, but can take over an hour by bus – and there are only three buses a day.
These kinds of challenges –the logistics of getting to an appointment, or whether it’s even scheduled at a workable time – often just aren’t considered by the system.
I heard a story recently about a man from Romney Marsh who didn’t want to miss his GP appointment – but there was no early morning transport available. Instead, he slept rough outside the surgery the night before. There are so many stories like that – often linked to transport – and these are relatively simple issues to fix. For example, when someone doesn’t turn up to an appointment and they’re coded as Did Not Attend, the assumption is often that they’re being non-compliant. But sometimes, life just got in the way. Rather than placing blame, let’s look at how the system might need to change to meet people where they are.
Rather than placing let’s look at how might need to change meet people where
How are you supporting innovations that tackle issues like menstrual health, menopause or maternal care – particularly for marginalised or underserved groups?
placing
blame, how the system change to where they are.
When we talk about health inequalities and the social determinants of health, it’s crucial to understand that 80% of what affects someone’s health happens outside of healthcare. The rest comes from things like housing, education, behaviours, transport – and increasingly, digital exclusion plays a part too.
We try to offer simple, tangible examples of small changes that individuals can make in their daily work – because even those can have a real impact.
Take the example of someone who had to sleep rough because there was no transport to their appointment. A small intervention at the booking stage, asking about transport, could have made all the
difference. These are practical, frontline changes that can be implemented quickly, without huge resources, but they matter. Maybe the solution is about building healthier communities –creating spaces for well-being, for connection. That could involve working with the voluntary sector, supporting local community centres, or investing in group activities that reduce isolation. These kinds of shifts are starting to happen, and I’m hopeful. With the new 10 Year Health Plan now in place, and prevention recognised as a central priority, there’s a real opportunity to supercharge this work.
What does success look like for Health Innovation KSS five years from now?
For us, innovation isn’t just about technology – it’s about transforming both health and social care, and reimagining how that transformation happens. We see ourselves as the facilitator in that conversation: bringing together a wide range of partners – from industry and commercial organisations to academics and universities – to tackle some of the system’s most pressing challenges.
Looking ahead over the next five years, we want to move beyond individual projects and focus more on driving large-scale system transformation. Where can we have the biggest impact? How can we help scale innovation across the system – especially digital innovation?
Ultimately, the benefits of digital transformation must be shared equitably. We can’t afford to create a two-tier system, where people with money, education, and resources get a better deal and more support for their health. We need to ensure that digital transformation improves health outcomes, experiences, and access for everyone – not just a few.
“FEMTECH IS NOT
Paediatrician, educator, author and founder, Dr Lara Zibners, talks about the future of female-led innovation and investors’ attitudes to opportunities within women’s health.
Written by Glen Ferris.
FROM the emergency room to the board room, Dr Lara Zibners’ journey from paediatric emergency medicine to vital Femtech founder has been nothing short of inspiring.
However, despite being recognised as a critical voice, an educator, author, academic and innovator, she, like many other investors who focus on women’s health, struggles to be taken seriously by mainstream backers.
Talking to Healthcare Today, Lara discusses the future of female founders and the transformative momentum in women’s health innovation…
Calla Lily Clinical Care, of which you are the co-founder and chair, was recently been backed by an additional £1.1 million in funding. Is this indicative of increased investor confidence in the Femtech innovation landscape?
The National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) granted us £1.1 million, but government funding moves slowly. We found out about the funding in February 2024, and the press announcement came over a year later!
Unfortunately, we’re on a losing streak right now. We’ve recently had 12 rejections in a row because grant success depends on who’s reviewing. It’s exhausting to be honest, I’m out here slapping the air, hoping to hit someone with money.
It helps that our team is brilliant, including an ex-Goldman Sachs investment banker and super-smart product engineers; we hold seven PhDs between the team. But without funding, execution is stalled.
As Kearney’s Paula Bellostas Muguerza highlighted in an interview with Healthcare Today, why is such research so chronically underfunded when women make up 51% of the population?
I think it’s multifactorial. First, women were excluded from research for years because of a failure to recognise biological sex differences. We are not 70-kilo white dudes, and our bodies react differently.
Then there’s the fact that the investment world is dominated by men who don’t want to say “vagina” at their Monday morning meeting. Marina Gerner wrote that viral article about investors’ problems with vaginas, it’s silly but real. Nowhere else in investing do you hear the phrase “I’ll ask my wife”, except in women’s health. They should see a market opportunity, not treat it like a charity case.
Then there’s timing: after 2020, Initial public offerings (IPOs) dried up, funding pipelines froze, and valuations got messy.
A CHARITY CASE”
print and get creative. The key is networking. I co-host events with other founders to share investor contacts. Programmes like the Global Business Innovation Programme took us to Boston and New York, which opened doors.
At the end of the day, though, startup karma matters. If you help others and share resources, opportunities come back.
Does Femtech still struggle to be seen as mainstream healthcare as opposed to niche wellness?
Oh, absolutely. The minute women’s health gets labelled a trillion-dollar market, the bad actors show up. Look at the vaginal microbiome space, it’s the new AI. My husband’s shampoo now claims to protect his microbiome!
There’s so much we don’t understand, but that doesn’t stop companies from selling pineapple gummies to make you smell better. It’s snake oil.
Investors prefer digital health because it’s low-burn, but they lump serious biotech like ours with Gwyneth Paltrowesque Goop wellness. There’s also this patronising idea that women should only solve women’s problems. I was on a panel where someone said they only back founders solving personal experiences, as if men can’t care about miscarriage or women can’t found AI companies.
Serious tech scares investors because it’s capital-intensive. We have an incredible team that needs to eat, but we’re not chasing quick wins. Every decision comes down to: “We’re not that kind of company”.
We have shut down shortcuts that compromise ethics. That’s why our no jerks policy rules out most institutional investors; we’ll take funding, but not at the cost of our mission.
NHS RECRUITMENT FREEZES WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR THE
WITH NHS trusts in England busy balancing the books and wiping out a reported £7 billion financial shortfall, the cuts to clinical and non-clinical jobs and recruitment freezes are being felt across the industry.
Resident doctors are struggling to find placements, student midwives are putting in hundreds of hours of work with no job lined up, and understaffing is leaving nurses and doctors overworked and stressed. Years ago, training to be a nurse, doctor or midwife – a gruelling three to five years of school and years of further training and work experience – would land you a job for life. But now, this is no longer the case. Reports of hospitals being short-staffed are so commonplace that it seems to become synonymous with UK healthcare, but likewise, are tightening budgets and stalled recruitment that lead to worsening the problem, rather than improving it.
With many making the decision to go into medical school by the time they choose their GCSEs at 15, over a decade before fully qualifying, many set their sights on a dream that won’t be a reality by the time they graduate. Newly qualified healthcare staff find themselves competing with more experienced candidates, and experienced staff are choosing between entry-level pay, having to uproot their lives to another area, or turning to working for an agency that will offer them higher pay and more flexibility.
Competition for jobs has risen due to recruitment freezes and cost-cutting, paired with the growing demands of an ageing population, with the British Medical Association saying more than 33,000 doctors applied for fewer than 13,000 speciality training posts this year.
Jay
Thinsa, Chief Services Officer at healthcare staffing agency Kingdom Healthcare, discusses the recent NHS recruitment freezes affecting nurses, doctors and other healthcare staff.
It’s a challenge to see how widespread recruitment freezes imposed on trusts can align with drives to cut patient waiting times for NHS care. It’s likewise hard to see how cutting down the use of agency staff, as NHS England says it has done by almost £1 billion in the last financial year, would do anything but leave hospitals further understaffed.
For all healthcare staff, agency or not, staff shortages inevitably lead to stress and burnout that affect efficiency and performance. Low morale due to underfunding can impact how people feel about their job, and for a job that many are doing for the rewarding feeling of helping others, lack of motivation and morale can affect the NHS for years to come. As well as this, many healthcare workers may struggle to look ahead, with career progression and pay rises likely stalled in a country gripped with a cost-of-living crisis.
For agency staff, if recruitment freezes limit new permanent hires, the demand for staff will still be there, so the NHS may need to turn to agency workers more to fill critical roles. If trusts find that their hands are tied, it could lead to further understaffing, which would impact the quality of care patients receive.
Agency staff may also experience instability due to new rules that curtail the use of agencies, with agencies that offer reasonable costs that work to benefit both the NHS and the
worker being lumped together with agencies that charge much higher fees that cost the NHS more. While in the short term, this is challenging for any agency and staff, in the long term it may signify more opportunity for reasonable, reliable and high-quality agencies to shine through. Agencies should always be working around the needs of their client, whilst also offering the benefits that no doubt incentivise the best nurses and doctors possible.
For the NHS, understanding the value of agencies and why so many staff move to them could help in creating a stronger, brighter NHS. Agency staff often fill urgent staffing gaps to avoid service delays and cancellations, so the NHS can cope better with seasonal surges in demand. The flexibility they offer is ideal for seasonal demand as well, with agency staff being able to be brought in as needed, allowing trusts to scale up or down.
FREEZES THE INDUSTRY?
As well as this, understaffing leads to significant staff burnout; supplementation can reduce stress and burnout and protect patients. One Unison survey revealed that 69% of shifts were understaffed across 42 UK hospitals, a shocking statistic that would no doubt leave anyone scrambling for immediate solutions. While pledges are made for change in the next decade, progress is often too slow to meet the rising healthcare demand – we need to be open to other solutions, rather than close doors.
While Wes Streeting has pledged to cut the amount spent on agency staff, this will lead to further understaffing. As well as this, concern over agency pay is rightly scrutinised, for agencies that charge the NHS very high fees, which signifies how many healthcare staff are struggling to get by on NHS wages, and have to turn to agencies in order to make ends meet.
SUPPORTING DOCTORS
Alex Fairweather looks at how technology and artificial intelligence can transform private practice.
“We think that AI is poised to transform medicine, delivering new, assistive technologies that will empower doctors to better serve their patients. Machine learning has dozens of possible application areas, but healthcare stands out as a remarkable opportunity to benefit people.” Google Health
Private practice faces unprecedented challenges in today’s landscape, from rising administrative burdens to intensifying competition. However, artificial intelligence and emerging technology offer powerful tools to help doctors thrive. These innovations can revolutionise patient acquisition, enhance clinical care, streamline operations, and develop the essential business skills that medical school never taught.
AI-enhanced patient acquisition and engagement
Patient acquisition strategies have evolved beyond traditional marketing approaches. AI-powered platforms enable highly personalised marketing campaigns by analysing demographics, behaviour, and search histories to create customised messages resonating with prospective patients. Practices can focus their marketing efforts, leading to higher conversion rates and more efficient resource utilisation.
Marketing automation plays a crucial role in maintaining consistent patient
engagement through targeted email campaigns, social media posts and SMS reminders. AI algorithms analyse patient engagement metrics to determine optimal timing for marketing messages and identify content that resonates with different patient segments. Predictive analytics allows healthcare providers to anticipate patient needs before they arise, identifying individuals at risk for certain conditions and delivering timely communication and treatment options.
AI-powered chatbots provide 24/7 patient engagement, answering inquiries instantly, assisting with appointment scheduling and providing crucial information. These virtual assistants handle multiple interactions simultaneously while personalising responses based on individual patient data, ensuring potential patients can access practice information even outside business hours. Whilst chatbots won’t replace experienced practice staff, they can help alleviate basic repetitive conversations.
Clinical decision support and treatment enhancement
AI-driven clinical tools are transforming patient care. These systems are trained on extensive patient data, comprehensive medical literature, and real-time information to offer evidence-based recommendations to clinicians. Machine learning algorithms assist in diagnosing medical conditions, proposing tailored treatment plans and predicting potential outcomes through multifaceted analysis of diverse datasets.
Electronic Health Records integration with AI tools such as scribes provides automated documentation and reduced administrative burden through ambient intelligence for real-time clinical note-taking.
Telemedicine platforms enhanced with AI capabilities expand practice reach while improving patient access to care. Remote patient monitoring enables continuous care
DOCTORS IN THE DIGITAL AGE
management, with AI-enhanced telehealth providing automated data interpretation and clinical insights. These virtual consultation capabilities have proven particularly valuable for maintaining patient relationships.
Practice management and operational efficiency
Intelligent automation of timeconsuming tasks transforms practice management. Workflow optimisation through process automation and intelligent scheduling streamlines staff allocation, appointment scheduling, and routine administrative tasks.
Predictive analytics optimises resource allocation across staffing levels, medical supplies, and facility utilisation by analysing historical data, current trends and future projections. AI-driven billing and coding systems provide automated diagnostic code suggestions and streamlined revenue cycle management, while
inventory management systems use predictive analytics for supply chain optimisation. Practice management software integration connects all operational aspects, providing scalability and remote access capabilities. Data analytics dashboards enable practice performance monitoring and business intelligence, while insurance verification and claims processing reduce administrative overhead.
Business skills development and training
The gap between clinical training and business competency represents a critical challenge for doctors. Medical schools traditionally focus on clinical skills while providing minimal business education, but modern private practice demands both. Business education addresses essential knowledge in management, with leading establishments recognising that doctors require an understanding of both the clinical and business aspects of healthcare delivery.
Digital transformation education, or at least hiring talent with specific knowledge, becomes increasingly important as practices implement new technologies. Change management skills and technology integration training ensure the successful adoption of AI and other advanced systems while maintaining focus on patient care.
Implementation and future outlook
Successful adoption of technology in private practice works best through phased implementation, allowing teams to adapt while ensuring that patient care and communication remain at the forefront. Prioritising comprehensive staff training and change management supports a smooth transition and preserves the compassionate environment essential to quality healthcare. Regularly tracking outcomes, such as patient satisfaction and operational improvements, helps ensure that technology solutions serve both clinical and human needs. Integrating AI alongside emerging technologies empowers practices with smarter workflows and more responsive care. These tools are most effective when they amplify rather than replace the expertise, empathy, and communication central to the doctor-patient relationship. When used thoughtfully, technology and innovations support independent physicians in delivering more personalised, attentive care.
Ultimately, technology should be viewed not as a substitute for human connection but as a partner that enhances it. By combining clinical excellence, business skills, and digital tools, physicians can build sustainable, thriving practices that keep meaningful patient relationships at the heart of healthcare.
RECENT developments at University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust have sent a sobering message across the healthcare landscape. As reported by BBC News, the number of deaths and injuries under police investigation at the Trust has more than doubled, now encompassing more than 200 cases across various departments.
These cases, which include allegations of avoidable deaths, poor treatment, and whistleblower suppression, point to something far more serious than isolated clinical errors. They suggest deep-rooted, systemic governance malfunctions, malfunctions that may have been preventable had concerns been listened to and investigated earlier.
At TMLEP, we understand that behind every case is a patient, a family, and often, staff who tried to speak up. The scale and sensitivity of such failures demand more than internal reviews, they require independent, structured, and transparent investigation to rebuild trust and drive reform.
TMLEP’s lead healthcare investigator Nina Vegad calls for transparent investigation and systemic change following recent developments at University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust.
When systemic risk replaces isolated error
When failures repeat across services for example, maternity, cardiology, orthopaedics, and over multiple years, we are no longer talking about individual lapses. We are confronting systemic weakness:
• Ineffective clinical governance, where safety signals are missed or dismissed.
• Suppressed whistleblowing, where staff feel punished for raising concerns.
• A culture of denial, where reputation management overshadows patient care.
In the Sussex case, several former staff members have publicly stated that they tried to raise issues, only to be ignored or forced out. This is sadly not unique.
TMLEP’s work across the UK has shown that many clinical incidents escalate not because they were unforeseeable, but because early warnings were missed, mismanaged, or muted.
What independent investigation brings to light
At TMLEP, our role is to carry out thorough, impartial investigations into clinical incidents, with a core focus on identifying why harm occurred, not just what happened. When applied to a systemic context, our methods provide:
• Holistic analysis of patterns and trends, not just one-off events.
• Multi-departmental insight, connecting risks across services, teams, or management structures.
NHS DEMAND
• A protected space for clinicians and whistleblowers to share concerns without fear of reprisal.
• Clear recommendations, based on expert clinical and governance review, to prevent recurrence and support longterm learning.
By holding a mirror up to the system, unflinchingly and independently, we create space for accountability and genuine change.
Why internal reviews are not enough
Too often, internal reviews lack transparency or independence, especially when the institution under scrutiny is also the one reviewing its own conduct. In high-profile or highvolume cases, internal processes may:
• Narrow the scope.
• Fail to gain the trust of staff and families.
• Miss interrelated failures between clinical care, management, and policy implementation.
Independent investigations, by contrast, can work alongside regulators and legal processes, not in conflict with them.
At TMLEP, we collaborate with NHS bodies, Trusts, coroners, and legal teams to ensure that findings are clinically robust, legally defensible, and practically implementable.
A call for proactive learning, not reactive response
It should not take media pressure, police involvement, or tragedy on a mass scale to trigger meaningful review.
NHS Trusts must adopt a proactive approach to safety, integrating regular external reviews, structured feedback loops, and clear whistleblowing channels into their governance frameworks.
TMLEP’s independent clinical investigations are designed to help organisations do just that. Whether as part of a post-incident response,
a cultural review, or a learning and development strategy, these investigations provide a vital tool to anticipate risk, not simply respond to it.
Conclusion: Trust begins with transparency
The crisis at Sussex Trust, and others before it, show us what happens when systemic issues are allowed to fester unchecked.
But they also highlight the importance of listening, investigating, and acting when the warning signs appear.
At TMLEP, we believe in fostering a healthcare system where learning is continuous, accountability is shared, and patient safety is central to every decision.
Through independent investigation, we help organisations not just recover from failure, but evolve beyond it.
For more information on TMLEP’s services, click here.
STARTING STRONG: A PRACTICAL CONSULTANTS ENTERING
ESTABLISHING yourself in private practice is an exciting and rewarding step in your medical career. After years of training, NHS service, and clinical excellence, many consultants decide to enter the independent sector to gain autonomy, improve work-life balance, and diversify income.
But setting up in private practice comes with its own learning curve, especially when it comes to business administration, billing, and financial flow.
At Medserv, we’ve worked with hundreds of consultants across all specialties, helping them build sustainable and financially secure private practices.
This article offers a practical, structured guide for newly independent consultants navigating their first years in private practice. Whether you’re just starting out or refining your setup, the steps below will help position your practice for long-term success.
Get registered on the Private Practice Register (PPR)
Before seeing your first patient, it’s vital to ensure you’re properly registered on the Private Practice Register (PPR).
This centralised platform (supported by major private medical insurers like Bupa, AXA Health, Aviva and others) streamlines the credentialing process by enabling consultants to maintain a single, verified profile accessible by hospitals and insurers.
Thinking of setting up in private practice? Let Medserv’s Derek Kelly guide you through the essential first steps...
Why it matters:
• Most hospitals require PPR registration as part of their practising privileges approval process.
• It simplifies insurance recognition, helping you get listed with insurers faster.
• It reduces paperwork by providing a central hub for professional documentation.
Understand the fee structure: Self-pay vs. insured patients
Private practice in the UK is paid for either by self-funding patients or medical insurers.
While the clinical service may be the same, the billing process differs significantly.
Insured Patients: Most UK insurers operate under fee-assured arrangements. This means the insurer has a set fee schedule for procedures. If you agree to be “fee assured,” you accept these rates in exchange for simplified billing and faster reimbursement.
• Cons: Often lower than market rate for some procedures, especially surgical fees.
Self-Pay Patients: With self-funding patients, you set your own fees.
This offers greater flexibility and the potential for higher income, but pricing must be carefully considered to remain competitive and fair.
Benchmarking your selfpay fees
There is no universal pricing standard, but there are established benchmarks you can use to guide your fee structure. These include:
• PHIN (Private Healthcare Information Network): Offers data on typical prices charged across the UK for procedures and consultations.
• Local Competitor Rates: Research what consultants in your specialty are charging, especially in the hospitals or regions you plan to practise in.
• Hospital Pricing Teams: Many private hospitals provide guidance on typical fee ranges and can advise what is acceptable for their self-pay packages.
Key considerations:
• Align initial fees conservatively while building your reputation.
• Ensure pricing reflects your expertise and subspecialty.
• Display fees transparently where appropriate. We are seeing that patients increasingly value this.
• At Medserv, we provide our consultants with custom benchmarking reports to help set fair, evidence-based fees.
PRACTICAL GUIDE FOR
ENTERING PRIVATE PRACTICE
Optimise billing and keep track of payments
The clinical part of private practice may be familiar, but the financial side is not something most consultants are trained in.
Left unchecked, billing and unpaid invoices can quickly become a source of stress and lost income.
A robust billing process includes:
• Prompt invoicing (ideally within 24 - 48 hours of consultation or surgery).
• Correct coding (especially for surgical procedures).
• Chasing unpaid invoices diplomatically but consistently.
• Reconciling insurer remittances to identify underpayments or errors.
Even more importantly, consultants must maintain visibility over their income.
Using online reporting systems allows you to:
• Track payments by patient, insurer, or procedure.
• Identify aged debt.
• Forecast income and spot cashflow trends.
Cashflow is king in private practice. A delayed payment may not seem critical in month one, but over time, poor billing hygiene can lead to significant income gaps.
Working with a billing partner like Medserv can help automate these processes.
We offer consultants real-time access to payment data via our online portal, ensuring full transparency and peace of mind.
Use patient feedback to grow your practice
In today’s digital world, word of mouth is no longer limited to conversations in waiting rooms.
Reviews are a critical driver of reputation and patient acquisition, especially for self-paying patients who often choose consultants based on Google searches or online profiles.
A simple yet powerful way to grow your presence is to add a Doctify QR code or link on your invoices.
Doctify is one of the UK’s leading review platforms for medical professionals. By adding a Doctify QR code or link to your invoices or email communications, you can encourage satisfied patients to leave reviews after their consultation or treatment.
Benefits:
• Boost your online visibility.
• Build trust with new patients.
• Provide social proof of clinical excellence and bedside manner.
It’s a small step that can yield significant long-term returns, especially in competitive areas like London or the Home Counties.
Stay compliant and protected
Lastly, don’t neglect the regulatory and professional safeguards that
underpin private work. These include:
• Medical indemnity insurance covering private practice specifically.
• ICO registration for handling patient data.
• CQC registration, where relevant (e.g., if you run your own clinic premises).
• Accurate record-keeping for financial and clinical audit purposes.
Partnering with trusted administrative and financial advisors ensures your practice not only runs smoothly, but also safely.
Launching into private practice is a milestone achievement, but like any business, success depends on organisation, financial control, and patient satisfaction.
By setting strong foundations, clear pricing, timely billing, transparent reporting, and thoughtful patient engagement, you position your practice to thrive.
At Medserv, we’re proud to support consultants at every stage of their private journey, from initial setup to full practice growth. Whether you’re still navigating PPR registration, unsure about your self-pay pricing, or struggling with inconsistent cashflow, we’re here to help you take control of the business side, so you can focus on what you do best.
Interested in learning more about how Medserv supports new consultants? Visit medserv.co.uk or contact us directly for a no-obligation chat.
Published by Healthcare Today Media Ltd. Healthcare Today is editorially independent. Material is governed by copyright.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form without permission, unless for the purposes of reference and comment.
