Dispensing GPs lose appeal against discontinuation after new pharmacy approved
In News
Follow this topic
Bookmark
Record learning outcomes
A Berkshire GP surgery has lost its appeal against the local integrated care board’s decision to discontinue its dispensing services for 55 patients after an application to open a pharmacy was granted.
Theale Medical Centre, which dispenses medicines for around 1,300 patients, had fought to maintain its services in the neighbouring village of Calcot in an appeal recently considered by NHS Resolution.
The appeal followed Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire and Berkshire West ICB’s February 19 decision to grant Hetherby Ltd’s application to open a pharmacy on Halls Road in Calcot.
Granting the application, the ICB noted that the most recent pharmaceutical needs assessment (PNA) had identified a “gap in provision” in the locality and said it was satisfied that the proposed pharmacy “would meet the current need included in the PNA in full”.
The ICB noted that 61 dispensing patients lived within a 1.6kkm radius of the new pharmacy’s proposed address, commenting that it was “inclined that the service provided by the dispensing doctors to the affected patients should be discontinued” should the application be granted, with the five affected GP surgeries to be given a month’s notice.
Theale Medical Centre had the highest number of patients at 55, followed by Chapel Row Surgery at three. The other three surgeries had just one patient each.
In its appeal against the decision to discontinue dispensing arrangements for its Calcot patients, Theale Medical Centre stated: “Dispensing income is a core component of the practice’s financial model and directly supports the infrastructure required to deliver safe and effective primary care services to our rural population.”
The surgery argued that removing 55 of its dispensing patients would affect its ability to employ trained dispensary staff, invest in medicines management and digital prescribing systems, and devote the “clinical time” needed for medication reviews and prescribing oversight.
“Dispensing income does not operate in isolation,” the appeal stated, adding: “It supports the wider practice model. A reduction in dispensing numbers reduces economies of scale and increases the per patient cost of maintaining a compliant and safe dispensing service.
“If dispensing numbers progressively reduce across the locality, the impact extends beyond a single practice.”
The decision “risks destabilising the rural dispensing model more broadly,” it said, arguing this could result in reduced staffing and have “knock-on effects on the availability of integrated GP dispensing care in rural communities”.
Commenting on the appeal on behalf of Hetherby Ltd, Healthcare Plus Consulting said the surgery had not specified any grounds of appeal, adding: “We are doubtful that the discontinuation related to the proposed pharmacy would ‘adversely affect’ the appellant.
“We note that only 55 out of the appellant’s 1,300 patients are affected. This equates to less than five per cent of their patients.”
Refusing the appeal, NHS Resolution’s primary care appeals committee found that “no information had been provided in support of [the medical centre’s] assertions, especially where 95 per cent of dispensing would be unaffected”.
Nearby Pottery Road Pharmacy also submitted comments objecting to the decision to grant Hetherby Ltd’s application. However, it did not submit a valid appeal within 30 days of the decision and so its comments were not considered by NHS Resolution.