Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Editorials

Prevention in the 2020s: where is primary care?

David N Blane, Andrea E Williamson, Sara Macdonald and Catherine A O’Donnell
British Journal of General Practice 2020; 70 (697): 376-377. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp20X711809
David N Blane
General Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow.
Roles: GP and Clinical Research Fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andrea E Williamson
Undergraduate Medical School, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Nursing, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow.
Roles: GP and Clinical Senior University Lecturer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sara Macdonald
General Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow.
Roles: Senior Lecturer in Primary Care
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Catherine A O’Donnell
General Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow.
Roles: Professor of Primary Care Research and Development
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

The 2020s will be the decade of ‘proactive, predictive, and personalised prevention’, according to the UK Government’s recent green paper on preventing ill health.1 The 78-page report describes a large range of initiatives to be implemented in the coming decade in England, including a ‘portfolio of new innovative projects’, an evidence-based review of NHS Health Checks, a new National Genomics Healthcare Strategy, a ban on selling energy drinks to under-16s, and new strategies using ‘intelligent’ technology-driven screening programmes to prevent sexually transmitted infections and to increase uptake of vaccination. It also sets a target for England to be smoke free by 2030 and promises a new ‘Composite Health Index’, as recommended by the Chief Medical Officer for England in her 2018 annual report, to track the nation’s wellbeing and assess the health impacts of wider government policies.2

Many of these proposals are welcome — technology certainly has a key role to play in the future of health care, as outlined previously in the BJGP 3,4 — but the report has not been without its critics. In particular, it has been widely criticised for lacking action and ambition on food and obesity, and has no mention of a minimum price for a unit of alcohol.5

We believe it is also weakened by insufficient attention to the role of primary care, to support and action on improving the social determinants of health, and to action targeting marginalised groups. Unless these gaps are addressed, the government’s proposals for ‘personalised prevention’ will benefit a select few and will see health inequalities widen.

THE ROLE OF PRIMARY CARE

Some public health interventions require no contact with the public (for example, legislation), while others require one-off or occasional contact (for example, breast screening), but many benefit substantially through delivery in primary care, drawing on the strengths of that setting where care is available unconditionally over the long term in communities. This is particularly true in communities that are underserved and marginalised, and where interventions are targeting health-related lifestyle risks.

In the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) 2018 report, Prevention is Better Than Cure, which preceded the green paper, primary care is recognised as a ‘central part of our vision’.6 The report endorsed ‘prioritising investment in primary and community healthcare’, where the majority of prevention activity in the health and social care system is likely to occur. It highlighted the need for expansion of the GP workforce, retention of experienced GPs, and GPs working more closely with other professionals. It also recognised the significance of multimorbidity and highlighted that people living with long-term health conditions are the main users of health and social care services in England. In this context, a prevention agenda addresses not only primary prevention, but also includes prevention of complications, slowing progression of illness, and supporting recovery — all staples of good primary care.

Disappointingly, the current green paper all but ignores primary care, with no strategic role beyond rolling out social prescribing (previous policy) and in relation to brief interventions for weight management.

WIDER DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH

The report starts with tokenistic references to the social determinants of health in its ‘Introduction’ section. For instance, it acknowledges that women living in the 10% most socioeconomically deprived areas can expect to live 18 fewer years in good health than those in the 10% least deprived areas. It goes on to acknowledge that those living on low incomes and people with problem debt are at higher risk of mental health problems, and that multimorbidity is more common in deprived communities.

Yet it is notably silent on ‘upstream’ responses to these issues and pays little attention to them throughout the three main chapters (‘Opportunities’, ‘Challenges’, and ‘Strong foundations’). In the ‘Challenges’ chapter, for instance, there is a section called ‘wider factors’, in which the report neglects all of what most of us would consider to be the wider determinants of health — poverty, food insecurity, unemployment, poor housing — and includes only alcohol, drug use, and sleep. The verdict from the Royal College of Physicians was that ‘… the biggest omission from the paper is a clear understanding of the link between poverty and ill health’.7 Clear action is woefully absent.

TARGETING MARGINALISED GROUPS

The 2018 DHSC report promotes targeting and coordinating services for groups that are most at risk, emphasising the need to ‘get better at adapting support to meet the needs of vulnerable groups’.6 The example of smoking is presented, where 40% of adults with a serious mental illness are smokers compared with just under 15% across the whole adult population.

Again, in contrast to this, the more recent green paper pays lip service to targeting resources for marginalised groups and does so only in relation to smoking. It is now well recognised that the four main modifiable risk factors for the major non-communicable diseases (NCDs) — smoking, obesity, physical inactivity, and alcohol consumption8 — often coexist within individuals, and are concentrated among the most socioeconomically deprived groups where they exert greater levels of risk.9–11 It follows, therefore, that if the approaches to prevention proposed are to be targeted at individuals, at the very least those efforts should be targeted to where needs are greatest, in keeping with the principle of proportionate universalism.12 Recent examples in Scotland include investment in urban renewal13 and the targeting of community-links practitioners to practices in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation.14

BOLD ACTION REQUIRED NOW

The prevention strategy for England is still in the consultation stage, with the government response not expected until October 2020. Attention to the role of a properly resourced health and social care infrastructure, legislation, and regulation as examples of ‘upstream’ prevention interventions are notably absent from the government’s green paper. These are important, but meeting the challenge of clustering of unhealthy behaviours, which are strongly socially patterned and often concentrated among particularly marginalised groups, requires action that is targeted, coordinated, and addresses the social determinants of health.

If we are to take anything positive from this green paper, it is encouraging that it acknowledges ‘prevention in wider policies’: that illness prevention is enacted from many and wide-ranging strands of government action. However, the fragmented approach of the whole green paper reduces its ability to communicate what that should mean. This green paper needs to provide clear strategic direction to address social determinants while also acknowledging the role of primary care in working with individuals and communities to improve health and wellbeing.

Notes

Provenance

Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Competing interests

The authors have declared no competing interests.

  • © British Journal of General Practice 2020

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Cabinet Office, Department of Health and Social Care
    Advancing our health: prevention in the 2020s2019https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/advancing-our-health-prevention-in-the-2020s (accessed 15 Jun 2020).
  2. 2.↵
    1. Department of Health and Social Care
    Chief Medical Officer annual report 2018: better health within reach2018https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/chief-medical-officer-annual-report-2018-better-health-within-reach (accessed 15 Jun 2020).
  3. 3.↵
    1. Mistry P
    Artificial intelligence in primary careBr J Gen Pract2019DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp19X705137.
  4. 4.↵
    1. Moore SF,
    2. Hamilton W,
    3. Llewellyn DJ
    Harnessing the power of intelligent machines to enhance primary careBr J Gen Pract2018DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp17X693965.
  5. 5.↵
    1. Mahase E
    Prevention green paper lacks ambition, say criticsBMJ2019366l4829
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Department of Health and Social Care
    Prevention is better than cure: our vision to help you live well for longer2018https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prevention-is-better-than-cure-our-vision-to-help-you-live-well-for-longer (accessed 15 Jun 2020).
  7. 7.↵
    1. Royal College of Physicians
    RCP ‘disappointed’ by government’s public health green paper2019https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/news/rcp-disappointed-governments-public-health-green-paper?mc_cid=2808332d75&mc_eid=0b571f7505 (accessed 15 Jun 2020).
  8. 8.↵
    1. World Health Organization
    Global action plan for the prevention and control of NCDs 2013–20202013https://www.who.int/nmh/publications/ncd-action-plan/en (accessed 15 Jun 2020).
  9. 9.↵
    1. Buck D,
    2. Frosini F
    Clustering of unhealthy behaviours over time: implications for policy and practice2012https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/sites/default/files/field/field_publication_file/clustering-of-unhealthy-behaviours-overtime-aug-2012.pdf (accessed 15 Jun 2020).
  10. 10.
    1. Meader N,
    2. King K,
    3. Moe-Byrne T,
    4. et al.
    A systematic review on the clustering and co-occurrence of multiple risk behavioursBMC Public Health201616657
    OpenUrl
  11. 11.↵
    1. Foster HME,
    2. Celis-Morales CA,
    3. Nicholl BI,
    4. et al.
    The effect of socioeconomic deprivation on the association between an extended measurement of unhealthy lifestyle factors and health outcomes: a prospective analysis of the UK Biobank cohortLancet Public Health2018312e576e585
    OpenUrl
  12. 12.↵
    1. Marmot M
    Fair society, healthy lives Strategic review of health inequalities2010http://www.instituteofhealthequity.org/resources-reports/fair-society-healthy-lives-the-marmot-review/fair-society-healthy-lives-full-report-pdf.pdf (accessed 15 Jun 2020).
  13. 13.↵
    1. Egan M,
    2. Kearns A,
    3. Katikireddi SV,
    4. et al.
    Proportionate universalism in practice? A quasi-experimental study (GoWell) of a UK neighbourhood renewal programme’s impact on health inequalitiesSoc Sci Med20161524149
    OpenUrl
  14. 14.↵
    1. Mercer SW,
    2. Fitzpatrick B,
    3. Grant L,
    4. et al.
    Effectiveness of community-links practitioners in areas of high socioeconomic deprivationAnn Fam Med2019176518525
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 70 (697)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 70, Issue 697
August 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Prevention in the 2020s: where is primary care?
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Prevention in the 2020s: where is primary care?
David N Blane, Andrea E Williamson, Sara Macdonald, Catherine A O’Donnell
British Journal of General Practice 2020; 70 (697): 376-377. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp20X711809

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Prevention in the 2020s: where is primary care?
David N Blane, Andrea E Williamson, Sara Macdonald, Catherine A O’Donnell
British Journal of General Practice 2020; 70 (697): 376-377. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp20X711809
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • THE ROLE OF PRIMARY CARE
    • WIDER DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH
    • TARGETING MARGINALISED GROUPS
    • BOLD ACTION REQUIRED NOW
    • Notes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Faecal immunochemical test: challenges and opportunities for cancer diagnosis in primary care
  • Cervical screening: the evolving landscape
  • Greater support, recognition, and research for health visiting post-pandemic
Show more Editorials

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2022 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242