Vertical Integration of GP Practices with Acute Hospitals in England and Wales

Rapid Evaluation

Published in: HS&DR Rapid Evaluation Centre Topic Report (December 2020). doi: 10.3310/hsdr-tr-131295

Posted on on December 01, 2020

by Manbinder Sidhu, Jack Pollard, Jon Sussex

Read More

Access further information on this document at National Institute for Health Research

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.


Vertical integration refers to merging organisations that operate at different stages along the patient pathway. An organisation running an acute hospital and also operating primary care medical practices (general medical practitioner practices, 'GP practices') is an example of vertical integration. Evidence is limited concerning the advantages and disadvantages of different arrangements for implementing vertical integration, their rationale and their impact.


To understand the rationale for and early impact of vertical integration in the National Health Service (NHS) in England and Wales. To develop a theory of change for vertical integration.


A rapid, qualitative, cross-comparative case study evaluation, at three sites, in England (two) and Wales (one), comprised of three work packages: 1) rapid review of literature, telephone scoping interviews, and stakeholder workshop; 2) interviews with stakeholders across case study sites, alongside observations of strategic meetings and analysis of key documents from the sites; and 3) development of a theory of change for each site and for vertical integration overall.


We interviewed 52 stakeholders across the three case study sites. Gaining access to and arranging and completing non-participant observations proved difficult. The single most important driver of vertical integration proved to be the maintenance of primary care local to where patients live. Vertical integration of GP practices with organisations running acute hospitals has been adopted in some locations in England and Wales to address the staffing, workload and financial difficulties faced by some GP practices. The opportunities created by vertical integration's successful continuation of primary care—namely, to develop patient services in primary care settings and better integrate them with secondary care—were exploited to differing degrees across the three sites. There were notable differences between the sites in organisational and clinical integration. Closer organisational integration was attributed to previous good relationships between primary and secondary care locally, and to historical planning and preparation towards integrated working across the local health economy. The net impact of vertical integration on health system costs is argued by local stakeholders to be beneficial.


Across all three case study sites, the study team was unable to complete the desired number of non-participant observations. The pace of data collection during early interviews and documentary analysis varied. Due to the circumstances of the Covid-19 pandemic during project write-up, the team was unable to undertake site specific workshops during data analysis and an overall workshop with policy experts.


The main impact of vertical integration was to sustain primary medical care delivery to local populations in the face of difficulties with recruiting and retaining staff, and in the context of rising demand for care. This was reported to enable continued patient access to local primary care and associated improvements in the management of patient demand.

Future work

Evaluating the patient experience of vertical integration, effectiveness of vertical integration in terms of impact on secondary care service utilisation (accident and emergency attendances, emergency admissions and length of stay) and patient access (GP and practice nurse appointments) to primary care.

Research conducted by

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.