- John Posnett, director (yhec@york.ac.uk)
- York Health Economics Consortium, University of York, York YO1 5DD
A close observer of the NHS over the past 10 years might be forgiven for thinking that the debate about the concentration of acute hospital services has been driven more by the needs of NHS managers and the medical professions than by the needs of the local populations that they are supposed to serve. Managers have faced pressures to reduce unit costs and, in particular, the “wasteful” costs of management itself. The medical professions, through their respective royal colleges, have encouraged the closure or rationalisation of smaller units through pressures for greater subspecialisation.
The result has been pressure for further concentration in the provision of hospital services through rationalisation and trust mergers. The logic is inescapable: larger units reduce average costs through the operation of economies of scale and larger units improve patient outcomes by increasing average volumes of activity by clinicians. Unfortunately, this logic is not supported by the evidence.
Summary points
NHS managers have been subject in recent years to considerable pressure to increase concentration and trust mergers
This pressure has been justified by a belief that larger hospitals lead to lower average costs and better clinical outcomes
Evidence from research does not support any general presumption that larger hospitals benefit from economies of scale or that service concentration leads to improved outcomes for patients
Service planners would do well to give more prominence to the importance of ensuring that hospital services are local and easily accessible
Optimal hospital size
Even the most committed believers accept that there is a limit to the operation of economies of scale. Otherwise, the most efficient solution would be to concentrate all acute hospital services for the United Kingdom at a new mega-hospital somewhere around Leeds.
The empirical literature on economies of scale …
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record







CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Ventilator associated pneumonia
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Restless legs syndrome
Published 30 May 2012
Author's reply
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Full access to trial data holds many benefits and a few pitfalls, conference hears
Published 30 May 2012
Restless Legs Syndrome: Fact or Fiction
Published 30 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (9 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 15:42
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27