- Recommendation ID
- NG181/5
- Question
What is the clinical and cost effectiveness of inpatient rehabilitation provided by the independent sector compared with that provided by the NHS?
- Any explanatory notes
(if applicable) Out-of-area placements (recommendations 1.5.13 to 1.5.16)
The committee acknowledged that there were no relevant clinical outcomes or utility data to compute quality-adjusted life years, although it was their view that a person in supported accommodation would typically have improved activities of daily living. Reducing out-of-area placements would therefore lead to more people being appropriately discharged to supported accommodation, which would reduce costs and improve quality of life.
The committee was aware of evidence suggesting that for many people in out-of-area placements, it could be appropriate to offer rehabilitation in local inpatient units. Being in a local unit also makes it easier for people to maintain contact with their families, communities and local support networks or activities, such as peer support groups.
The committee shared anecdotal reports of people being in out-of-area placements for many years, without clinical oversight from the person's local area. To avoid this, they made recommendations with the aim of reducing out-of-area placements wherever possible, providing better support while people are in these placements and bringing them back to their local area as soon as possible. This included recommending time frames for reviewing out-of-area placements, which were based on committee consensus.
There was a lack of comparative evidence between services provided by the independent sector and the NHS. The committee acknowledged that the independent sector is an important provider of rehabilitation services; however, the services they provide are often a long way from where people live, and from the local area that funds their placement. Many independent units are locked, and lengths of stay are considerably longer (and therefore costlier) than in equivalent NHS services. There is little systematic and reliable evidence on the characteristics of users of these services or the effectiveness of these units, to establish if the longer stays are necessary. Given the potential for significant cost savings if the effectiveness in the 2 sectors were found to be the same, the committee made a research recommendation on inpatient rehabilitation provided by the independent sector.
Source guidance details
- Comes from guidance
- Rehabilitation for adults with complex psychosis
- Number
- NG181
- Date issued
- August 2020
Other details
Is this a recommendation for the use of a technology only in the context of research? | No |
Is it a recommendation that suggests collection of data or the establishment of a register? | No |
Last Reviewed | 01/08/2020 |