Clinical directors' views of centralisation and commissioning of cleft services in the UK

Aidan Searle*, Julia K. Scott, Jonathan Sandy, Andy R Ness, Andrea Waylen

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To determine the views of Clinical Directors working in the United Kingdom (U.K.) Cleft Service with regard to centralisation, commissioning and impact on cleft service provision.

METHODS: In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 11 Clinical Directors representing regional cleft services. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, a coding frame was developed by two researchers and transcripts were coded using a thematic, 'interpretive' approach.

RESULTS: Clinical Directors perceived the commissioning of cleft services in the U.K. to be dependent upon historical agreements and individual negotiation despite service centralisation. Furthermore, Clinical Directors perceived unfairness in the commissioning and funding of cleft services and reported inconsistencies in funding models and service costs that have implications for delivering an equitable cleft service with an effective Multidisciplinary Team.

CONCLUSIONS: National Health Service (NHS) commissioning bodies can learn lessons from the centralisation of cleft care. Clinical Directors' accounts of their relationships with specialist commissioning bodies and their perspectives of funding cleft services may serve to increase parity and improve the commissioning of cleft services in the U.K.

Original languageEnglish
Article number12
Number of pages9
JournalBMC Oral Health
Volume15
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 22 Jan 2015

Keywords

  • Centralisation
  • Clinical directors
  • Commissioning
  • Specialist services

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Clinical directors' views of centralisation and commissioning of cleft services in the UK'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this