Rejected outpatient referrals are putting patients at risk and increasing workload pressure on GPs

  • 6th May 2022

Hospitals are rejecting GP referrals for investigations and outpatient treatment at an increasing rate. In this blog, Patient Safety Learning looks at the patient safety issues caused by rejected referrals and lack of capacity in outpatient specialities. We call for the Government and NHS leaders to investigate the problem and take action to mitigate risks to patient safety.

In the wake of Covid-19 pandemic, the NHS continues to operate under enormous pressure. It faces the challenge of responding to ongoing Covid infections alongside addressing a growing and complex backlog of care and treatment, with an over-stretched workforce. But this backlog is not limited to the much-covered issue of hospital-based surgical waiting lists. We are also increasingly hearing that GPs are struggling to ensure patients can access outpatient services.

There is growing evidence that some hospitals are systematically rejecting new GP referrals to outpatient clinics. NHS England holds no formal data on rejected referrals. However, data relating to Appointment Slot Issues (ASIs) in the NHS e-Referral system, which handles around 95% of GP referrals in England, show that the number of referrals made for which there is no slot available has risen from 238,859 in February 2020 to 441,034 March 2022–an increase of 85%.[1] While these figures show lack of slots rather than specific numbers of rejected referrals, they clearly highlight a chronic lack of capacity in outpatient services. This correlates with the picture that has come out in our conversations with GPs—of patients with complex needs being pushed back to primary care because there is simply no space in outpatient clinics. The situation varies from speciality to speciality and is reportedly worse in areas such as mental health and neurology.

When outpatient services reject referrals, it leaves primary care with the burden of sourcing provision from another hospital or directly meeting patients’ needs. Many of these patients have complex issues that require urgent assessment and treatment beyond the expertise of a GP. The issue is not GPs’ unwillingness to work hard for patients, but rather a concern about the impact that shifting large amounts of complex cases to primary care will have on patient safety. As Doncaster-based GP Dr Dean Eggitt told us:

"Everyone's on board with shifting care to the community - it's the right thing to do for patients. But if we don't have the capacity to deal with it, people suffer."

As the NHS comes under increasing pressure, we ask whether hospitals are changing the criteria for accepting referrals from GPs, and how this is leaving patients unable to access the care and treatment they need. Following discussion with patients and GPs, we have identified six urgent patient safety issues related to rejected referrals. We are calling for NHS England and NHS Improvement to investigate and understand the scale of these risks, and to take urgent action to address them.

Rejected outpatient referrals: Urgent patient safety issues

1. Outpatient waiting lists are full

Where hospitals are rejecting new GP referrals to outpatient clinics and specialist services, patients are being ‘passed around the system’ and sometimes deteriorating further while waiting for treatment. Recent analysis by the Institute for Government highlighted that:

“GPs are responsible for the day-to-day management of many chronic conditions and when patients do not receive specialist care these generally get worse and harder to manage.”[2]

Our discussions with GPs suggest a lack of clarity on what to do if a patient’s referral is rejected. If a waiting list is full, GPs are being left to work out how to get their patients the specialist treatment they need. This is creating delays in care which has an impact on patient safety; in a recent poll of their members, the Doctors Association (DAUK) found that “90% of respondents believed a patient of theirs had come to harm because of a lack of access to outpatient services.”[3] These delays and rejections are also eroding patient trust in all areas of the healthcare system.

In December 2021, DAUK wrote to Sajid Javid MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, about concerns over lack of access to secondary care referral pathways. They highlighted that “allowing specialists who have not assessed the patient themselves to make the decision whether a referral is justified … risks patient safety.”[4] Some GPs have also expressed concern that referrals are being rejected on minor technicalities by administrative staff, without ever being seen by clinicians.

2. Services are not being prioritised on the basis of clear and consistent criteria

We believe that patients need to be prioritised according to their clinical need rather than constraints within secondary care, and that the NHS needs to be transparent with the public about referral assessment processes.

GPs have also told us about difficulties in getting investigation referrals accepted. One GP told us that their Trust has recently changed ultrasound scan request criteria and these referrals are now only being accepted if the referring GP is certain the patient requires surgery. This undermines the ability of GPs to flag potential issues and diagnose patients safely, and many are resorting to workarounds that they know will get the referral accepted.

Rejecting referrals based on waiting list capacity, without clear and consistent criteria, will also create a postcode lotteries in care across the country and exacerbate existing health inequalities. To ensure safety, new patients entering waiting lists need to be prioritised according to clinical need against those already on the list, rather than operating on a ‘first come, first served’ basis. In addition to this initial prioritisation, patients waiting for care need to be monitored and reprioritised as their level of need is likely to change as they wait. There is a major question as to who will be responsible for ensuring patient deterioration while waiting for care is picked up and acted upon.

3. ‘Advice and guidance’ is being used to limit waiting lists

There is concern amongst GPs that they are being asked to manage patients through the ‘advice and guidance’ (A&G) system when it is not appropriate to do so. A&G aims to reduce outpatient appointments in line with ambitious NHS targets.[5] In their letter to the Secretary of State, DAUK noted:

“A&G is a brilliant tool if there is a query over patient care, or some concern over whether a referral is appropriate. However, as GPs, if we have decided a referral is necessary, and the situation is outside our competency then we must refer onwards, in line with GMC advice.”[6]

Since October 2021 Barts Health NHS Trust in London has closed other referral pathways across most specialties, so that GPs can only use the advice and guidance system for referrals (now called ‘advice and refer’ within the Trust).[7] NHS England has also introduced nationwide targets to reduce outpatient appointments and increase A&G.[8] While we recognise the value of trialling new approaches, we are concerned that this particular strategy presents a risk to patient safety at a time where pressures across the system mean it may be inappropriately used as a way of keeping hospital waiting lists down.

4. GPs are having to take responsibility for patients they are not qualified or supported to treat

All GPs will have specific specialties in which they are less confident and therefore require additional support from secondary care. When this help is denied, patient safety is compromised. Dr Eggit told us about the risks involved in asking GPs to work on cases outside of their expertise:

"GPs know what they are doing - if they refer it's because they know they need help. When they don't get the help they need to treat patients, it causes harm."

With A&G being promoted as a way to reduce outpatient appointments, GPs are being asked to offer treatment pathways and prescribe medications that have not historically been dealt with in primary care, as they carry higher levels of risk. Without appropriate training and safeguards, this puts patients at potential risk and GPs in a precarious position. It also adds to the stress and decision-making burden of GPs, contributing to burnout, a problem primary care cannot afford at the moment.

One GP based in North East England told us:

“There is an ever-creeping transfer of management of complex conditions from secondary to primary care, without adequate training or resources to manage this safely. Locally, we have just lost our general geriatric clinic, where we would refer older patients with several serious conditions on numerous medications. As GPs, we do not have the capacity, resources or expertise to do a full geriatric assessment, and yet that is what we have been left to attempt. These patients require specialist assessment to identify the pertinent issues amongst all that complexity, and to decide how best to balance and treat these issues safely and acceptably for the patient. As a GP, this pervasive transfer of responsibility causes me significant anxiety and distress.”

5. Patient choice and shared decision making are being undermined

According to the summary of the NHS England and NHS Improvement March 2022 board meeting, “increasing patient choice is at the core of the delivery plan [for tackling the backlog].”[9] However, patients are currently unable to have much input into how their care and treatment should proceed. We welcome work to improve the electronic referral system to allow patients more choice when referred to secondary care, but if appointments do not exist, this will offer no choice at all. The NHS needs to prioritise tackling the root cause of lack of capacity in secondary care to allow for true patient choice.

Many patients are currently unable to have full and frank discussions about their priorities and options with a qualified specialist. They are instead having to rely on GPs’ limited knowledge of specialist areas, or guidance from a consultant, relayed by GP. There is no easy way for patients to ask a specialist about their treatment.

One GP told us that the use of A&G is also damaging their relationship with patients:

“When I relay that a consultant has suggested a treatment to a patient, they ask me why they aren’t seeing the consultant. I have to tell them the consultant has declined to see them, and that I will be treating them instead. It’s worrying for the patient and damages the trust they have in me and in the system.”

6. There is a lack of clarity on accountability

When a patient is referred to secondary care and that referral is rejected, it is unclear who is responsible for accessing alternative advice and treatment. If a patient experiences negative outcomes such as their condition deteriorating as a result of delays, who is responsible? If they want to raise concerns or complain, should they do this with the GP that referred them, or the secondary care provider that didn’t accept the referral? There is also concern that GPs will be held legally accountable for advice given by consultants through A&G.[10]

A survey of nearly 700 GPs carried out by the Medical Protection Society in 2021 demonstrates that clarity and reassurance for GPs is needed. It found that “nearly four in five GPs in the UK (77%) are concerned about facing investigation if patients come to harm as a result of delayed referrals or… services being unavailable or limited.”[11]

Professor Martin Marshall, Chair of the Royal College of GPs, said:

“GPs understand the pressures colleagues working in secondary care are facing and will only refer patients if they think it is in their best interests. It’s really important that when GPs refer patients to specialist services, these referrals are taken seriously and not dismissed without good reason.

“The patient safety issues raised in this article that relate to unsuccessful GP referrals are concerning and require further investigation. With the health service currently facing immense pressure, it is vital that acute and primary care work together to assess and respond to these concerns.”

How should the NHS respond to these issues?

As these six areas illustrate, the increase in rejected outpatient referrals is placing new pressures on GPs, with concerning implications for patient safety.

We believe that NHS England NHS Improvement, in partnership with the Department of Health and Social Care, should take the following action:

  1. Investigate the extent and impact of the current level of rejected outpatient referrals. There is currently no clear way to assess the number of referrals that are being rejected, and the reasons for rejection.
  2. Develop an action plan in response, which should include specific steps to prevent outpatient referrals being inappropriately rejected or transferred to A&G.
  3. Undertake wide patient and public engagement to ensure transparent knowledge and promote wider understanding of these issues and their impact on health services.

Acknowledging the immense pressure currently facing secondary care, we also see an opportunity for Clinical Commissioning Groups and incoming Integrated Care Systems to support primary and secondary care to work together on pathways focused on keeping patients safe, prioritising according to clinical need and rebuilding patient trust in the health system.

References

[1] NHS Digital, Appointment Slot Issue reports, Last Accessed 4 May 2022. https://digital.nhs.uk/services/e-referral-service/reports-and-statistics/appointment-slot-issue-reports

[2] Institute for Government, Performance Tracker 2021: General Practice, Last Accessed 19 April 2022. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/performance-tracker-2021/general-practice

[3] Doctors’ Association UK, DAUK’s joint letter to the health secretary – lack of access to secondary care referral pathways, 3 December 2021. https://www.dauk.org/news/2021/12/03/open-letter-to-rt-hon-sajid-javid-we-write-to-you-as-a-very-concerned-group-of-gps-regarding-the-lack-of-access-to-secondary-care-referral-pathways/

[4] Ibid.

[5] NHS England and NHS Improvement, Advice and Guidance, Last Accessed 19 April 2022. https://www.england.nhs.uk/elective-care-transformation/best-practice-solutions/advice-and-guidance/

[6] Doctors’ Association UK, DAUK’s joint letter to the health secretary – lack of access to secondary care referral pathways, 3 December 2021. https://www.dauk.org/news/2021/12/03/open-letter-to-rt-hon-sajid-javid-we-write-to-you-as-a-very-concerned-group-of-gps-regarding-the-lack-of-access-to-secondary-care-referral-pathways/

[7] Barts Health NHS Trust, Referrals (advice and refer, formerly advice and guidance), Last Accessed 19 April 2022. https://www.bartshealth.nhs.uk/referrals

[8] NHS England and NHS Improvement, 2022/23 priorities and operational planning guidance, Last Updated 23 February 2022. https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/2022-23-priorities-and-operational-planning-guidance/

[9] NHS England and NHS Improvement, Board Paper: Elective Recovery Programme update, March 2022. https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/BM2208Pu-elective-recovery-update-march-2022.pdf

[10] Pulse Today, GPs could be liable for hospital specialists’ advice under A&G, MDO warns, 6 April 2022. https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/referrals/gps-could-be-liable-for-hospital-specialists-advice-under-ag-mdo-warns/

[11] Four in five GPs fear reprisal over delayed referrals, 4 June 2022. https://www.medicalprotection.org/uk/articles/four-in-five-gps-fear-reprisal-over-delayed-referrals

GP Referrals Website

Share

A platform for anyone with an interest in patient safety to share and learn from one another. Learn more.

Sign up to our newsletter