Healthcare spending in the United Kingdom (UK) as a share of the gross domestic product (GDP) has increased since 1990, when it was 5.1 percent. By 2024, healthcare expenditure in the UK amounted to 11.1 percent of the GDP. Health expenditure in the UK compared to Europe  In comparison to other European countries in 2023, the UK ranked fifth highest in terms of healthcare spending as a share of the GDP. Top of the list was Germany, which spent 12.3 percent of its GDP on healthcare in this year. This was followed by Austria and Switzerland, which spent 11.8 percent and 11.7 percent on health, respectively. Performance of the NHS in the UK Waiting times have been getting worse in the A&E department over the years. The NHS has been falling behind the target that 95 percent of patients should be seen within four hours of arrival. As a result, the primary reasons for dissatisfaction with the NHS among the public are the length of time required to get a GP or hospital appointment and the lack of staff.   

In 2018, it was confirmed that the NHS England would receive an extra 20.5 billion British pounds (real-terms) in funding by 2023/24, a 3.4 percent increase per year on average. This statistic portrays the National Health Services (NHS) England five-year funding settlement from 2018/19 to 2023/24 (in billion GBP).

Healthcare spending in the United Kingdom stood at 317 billion British pounds in 2024. When looking at real healthcare expenditure*, spending already exceeded this amount in 2021, where it reached 324 billion British pounds in 2024 prices. Health expenditure in the UK compared to Europe In 2024, the UK spent almost 11 percent of its GDP on healthcare. In comparison to other European countries, this ranked the UK fifth in terms of health expenditure. At the top of the list was Switzerland, which spent 12 percent of its GDP on healthcare that year.  Performance of the NHS in the UK Waiting times have been getting worse in the A&E department over the years. The NHS has been falling behind the target that 95 percent of patients should be seen within four hours of arrival. As a result, the primary reasons for dissatisfaction with the NHS among the public are the length of time required to get a GP or hospital appointment and the lack of staff.

In 2024, the annual spending on public healthcare in the United Kingdom (UK) accounted for *** percent of GDP. This is an increase from *** percent in 2023. Total spending on health in the UK In total, approximately *** billion British pounds were spent on healthcare in the UK in 2024. Although, spending as a share of GDP decreased from 2009 to 2019, the total spending on health has continued to increase. Broken down by function, the UK government spent *** billion pounds on curative/rehabilitative care. Performance of the NHS in the UK Waiting times have been getting worse in the A&E department over the years. The NHS has been falling behind the target that ** percent of patients should be seen within * hours of arrival. As a result, the primary reasons for dissatisfaction with the NHS among the public are the length of time required to get a GP or hospital appointment and the lack of staff.

This publication provides the most detailed picture available of people who used NHS funded secondary mental health, learning disabilities and autism services in England during the financial year 2023-24. All the analysis included in this publication can be accessed in the associated machine-readable data file. Selected metrics and breakdowns at national level are also available in the reference tables. Information you need to know about the quality of these statistics and how they can be interpreted can be found in the main report. An interactive report is also available allowing you to explore some statistics in further detail. Demographic analysis (age, gender, ethnicity and Index of Multiple Deprivation) is presented for 2023-24. Please consult previous editions of this publication series for demographic analysis for previous years. All annual and monthly publications relating to uses of mental health, learning disabilities and autism services can be found in the related links below. Please note that data for 2023-24 makes use of population data from the 2021 Census and mid year 2023 population estimates. There are instances where the populations have changed significantly between 2011 and 2021 and this should be considered when comparing rates for 2022-23 onwards with previous years. NHS England is continually working to improve the relevance and usefulness of content in the Mental Health Bulletin. Following feedback, no further development of the Excel reference tables has been undertaken this year, despite the addition of new metrics and breakdowns. These breakdowns and metrics are included in the CSV however, and are also included in the interactive visualisation which accompanies this publication. Please note, the CSV files accompanying this year's publication have been split up in order to allow users to open the CSV in Microsoft Excel. The chapters used are based on the Metric numbers in the publication. Chapters 2 and 3 were discontinued in previous years and as such the metric numbers have been retained and there is no chapter 2 or 3 in this publication.

NHS Trusts

Contains:

Etr.csv contains parent NHS Trusts. All three NHS Trust files follow the same format and conventions, although fields 14 and 15 are only populated for NHS Trust Site records (thus found only in the ets file). This data is for current organisations, plus data for organisations that have closed

in the current or previous financial year. NHS Trusts exist in England and Wales.

The Secondary Uses Service (SUS +) is a collection of healthcare data required by hospitals and used for planning health care, supporting payments, commissioning policy development and research.

The Secondary Uses Services Payment By Results data set is derived from SUS+ and includes key data in support of the national tariff system which is used to determine the reimbursement of NHS funded care in England.

Following the handover of responsibility for the NHS Payment system from DH to NHS England and NHS improvements (formerly Monitor) in April 2013, PbR was effectively replaced by the National Tariff Payment System (NTPS) in April 2014. This new payment system currently retains the vast majority of PbR policy. Due to the embedded terminology, data item and extract naming consistency, SUS continues to refer PbR in SUS and therefore the terms 'Payment by Results', 'PbR', 'National Tariff Payment System' and 'NTPS' should be considered interchangeable when using SUS or any SUS Guidance.

Payment by Results (PbR) provides a transparent, rules-based national tariff system, used to determine the reimbursement of NHS funded care in England. PbR rewards efficiency, supports patient choice and diversity and encourages activity for sustainable waiting time reductions. Payment is linked to activity and adjusted for casemix. This ensures a fair and consistent basis for hospital funding rather than being reliant principally on historic budgets and the negotiating skills of individual managers. PbR is the payment system in England under which commissioners pay providers of NHS-funded healthcare for each patient seen or treated, considering the complexity of the patient’s healthcare needs. The two fundamental features of PbR are nationally determined currencies and tariffs. Currencies are the unit of healthcare for which a payment is made and can take a number of forms covering different time periods from an outpatient attendance or a stay in hospital, to a year SUS+ PbR Reference Manual v4.64 Copyright © 2019 NHS Digital 5 of care for a long-term condition. Tariffs are the set prices paid for each currency.

PbR currently covers most of the acute healthcare in hospitals, with national tariffs for admitted patient care, outpatient attendances and accident and emergency. This activity is submitted using Commissioning Data Sets (CDS). Current policy intends that the scope of PbR and national tariff will expand in future by introducing currencies and tariffs for mental health, community and other services

Timescales for dissemination can be found under 'Our Service Levels' at the following link: https://digital.nhs.uk/services/data-access-request-service-dars/data-access-request-service-dars-process

Introduction: Although hospitals are key health service providers, their financial ties to drug companies have been rarely scrutinised. In developing this body of work, we examine industry payments for non-research activities to National Health Service (NHS) trusts – hospital groupings providing publicly funded secondary and tertiary care in England. Methods: We extracted data from the industry-run Disclosure UK database, analysing payment distribution descriptively and identifying trends in medians with the Jonckheere-Terpstra test. The payment value and number per NHS trust were explained using random effects models. Results: Between 2015 and 2018, 116 companies reported paying £60,253,421.86 to 235 trusts. As a share of payments to all healthcare organisations the number of payments to trusts rose from 38.64% to 39.48%, but their value dropped from 33.01% to 23.61%. While the number of all payment types rose, fees for service and consultancy and contributions to costs of events increased by 61.55% and 29.43%, respectively. The median payment values decreased significantly for trusts overall, including those with lower autonomy from central government; providing acute services; and from four of the eight regions of England. The random effects model showed that trusts with all other service profiles received a significantly lower value of payments on average than acute trusts; and trusts from East England received significantly less than those from London. However, trusts enjoying greater autonomy from government did not receive significantly more payments than others. Trusts also received significantly lower (but not fewer) payments in 2018 than in 2015. Conclusion: NHS trusts were losing importance as funding targets relative to other healthcare organisations. Industry payment strategies shifted towards engaging with NHS trusts using events sponsorship, consultancies, and smaller payments. Industry prioritised payments to trusts with specific service and geographical profiles. More granular disclosure is necessary to understand the role of corporate funding across the health system.

This publication provides the most timely picture available of people using NHS funded secondary mental health, learning disabilities and autism services in England. These are experimental statistics which are undergoing development and evaluation. This information will be of use to people needing access to information quickly for operational decision making and other purposes. More detailed information on the quality and completeness of these statistics is made available later in our Mental Health Bulletin: Annual Report publication series. The Data Collection Board (DCB) has now approved the decommissioning of the interim collection of Early Intervention in Psychosis (EIP) waiting times information, known as NHS England Unify Collection within this publication. Waiting times for EIP for October 2019 activity onwards are now monitored using data from the Mental Health Services Data Set (MHSDS). From April 2020 NHS Digital is implementing a multiple submission window model for MHSDS which will enable the resubmission of data throughout the financial year. Following the implementation of the multiple submission window model providers will optionally be able to submit/resubmit data for each month of 2019-20 from April 2020 to 21 May 2020. The opportunity to resubmit data for each month of 2019-20 will impact on the statistics already published for the 2019-20 year. It is likely that the statistics for each month will be republished; however the publication method is as yet undecided and will be proportionate to the changes; further details will be communicated closer to the time. Please be aware of the potential impact of the multiple submission window model on previously published data and use these statistics with reference to it. Further information can be found on the NHS Digital Multiple submission window model for MHSDS webpage linked below. The Provisional March data file has been removed as this is now superseded by the published Performance March data. NHS Digital apologises for any inconvenience caused. From April 2020 onwards, NHS Digital has been implementing a multiple submission window model (MSWM) for MHSDS. This allows providers to retrospectively submit data for a specific reporting period once the initial provisional and performance submission windows have closed. For a limited time, providers were given the opportunity to submit revised monthly data for all months within 2019/20 using the MSWM. As of January 2021, NHS Digital has now released revised 'End of Year' versions of the main monthly csv files for each month between April 2019 and February 2020 which reflect these revised 2019/20 MSWM submissions that occurred after 'Final' monthly data had already been published. Both the 'Final' and 'End of Year' versions of the main monthly csv files are available to download under 'Resources'. The key facts corresponding to both versions are also presented below.

Out of Area Mental Health Placements

Data from NHS & Independent Providers in England

By data.world's Admin [source]

About this dataset

This dataset provides a comprehensive look into the Out of Area Placements (OAPs) happening in the mental health services in England. It gives insight on placements from both NHS and independent providers, giving an overall picture of how these placements are happening across the country.

By taking a closer look at this report we can gain understanding into what is going on with OAPs around us – like which questions are being asked, breakdowns of how it’s divided and number to back it up. With this data we can better understand issues that affect our community and do our part to help support those in need

More Datasets

For more datasets, click here.

Featured Notebooks

• 🚨 Your notebook can be here! 🚨!

How to use the dataset

This dataset provides information on out of area placements in mental health services in England from both NHS and independent providers. The dataset contains data related to the number placements, as well as breakdowns by region and provider. With this data you can explore the trends for out of area placements in your region and compare those trends with national level figures.

This guide will show you how to get started exploring this dataset.

Step 1: Understand The Data Set Structure

The first step for getting started is to get a good understanding of the structure of the dataset itself in order to better understand what types of questions we can ask our data with. This dataset has several columns which have been listed below:

• Publication Type : This column provides information on what type of report is being referenced such as statistical bulletin or key facts & figures etc

• Publication Period: This column represents a period within a year moment which periods are expressed by either month, quarter or financial year etc..

• Publication Date: This column informs us when the publication was made available online expressed as a date format e.g 2018-04-02)

• Question : Here we will find measurements such as people waiting an average or median length times such that they answer certain question asked by officials.

• Breakdown1, BreakDown1Code, ‘Breakdown1Description’ : These columns provide extra context into specific highlights from results in further detail eg Breakdowns include areas like Age Group ,Nationality (for immigration statistics) gender for population statistics etc... where code values may appear something like “OAP_AGE_All” and descriptions appear like “Waiting Times All Ages respectively .

• BreakDown2, BreakDown2Code, 'Breakdown2Description':These are data attributes similar top BreakDown 1 but at even more granular level eg Doctor Specialty/Department, Treatment Type, Indicators (for regional/local analysis), Countries ..etc . It's important not note here that breakdown 2 has deeper break down against Breakdown 1 depending further detail asked while investigating deeper under specified parameters /results .Eg You might want drill down ages into age groups 0–4, 5–14 ,15-29....etc excluding 65+ corresponding breakdown codes might be OAP_AGE_0

Research Ideas

• Creating insight into regional differences in mental health out of area placements in order to identify if more funding is needed and implement programs to address the predisposing risk factors for those regions with higher out of area placement rates.
• Comparing the amount of expenditure allocated on out of area placements between different areas and provinces, so that extra funding may be given to areas which need it more.
• Examining the correlation between changes in funding or policy and its effects on out of area placements at both a national and local level, in order to assess whether certain policies are successful or not at curbing them such as introducing preventative measures before placement outside an individual's region is necessary

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. Data Source

License

License: Dataset copyright by authors - You are free to: - Share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially. - Adapt - remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. - You must: - Give appropriate credit - Provide a...

NHS Reference Costs data shows how, and on what, almost £51 billion of NHS expenditure was used in the 2009-10 financial year.

This publication reports on Admitted Patient Care activity in England for the financial year 2023-24. This report includes but is not limited to analysis of hospital episodes by patient demographics, diagnoses, external causes/injuries, operations, bed days, admission method, time waited, specialty, provider level analysis and Adult Critical Care (ACC). It describes NHS Admitted Patient Care Activity, Adult Critical Care activity and performance in hospitals in England. The purpose of this publication is to inform and support strategic and policy-led processes for the benefit of patient care and may also be of interest to researchers, journalists and members of the public interested in NHS hospital activity in England. The data source for this publication is Hospital Episode Statistics (HES). It contains final data and replaces the provisional data that are released each month. HES contains records of all admissions, appointments and attendances at NHS-commissioned hospital services in England. The HES data used in this publication are called 'Finished Consultant Episodes', and each episode relates to a period of care for a patient under a single consultant at a single hospital. Therefore, this report counts the number of episodes of care for admitted patients rather than the number of patients. This publication shows the number of episodes during the period, with breakdowns including by patient's age, gender, diagnosis, procedure involved and by provider. Please send queries or feedback via email to enquiries@nhsdigital.nhs.uk. Author: Secondary Care Open Data and Publications, NHS England. Lead Analyst: Karl Eichler

In the financial year 2020/21, total operating income of the NHS amounted to just over *** billion British pounds. This was an increase from the previous year where operating income stood at roughly ** billion British pounds. This statistic shows the National Health Service (NHS) total operating income in the United Kingdom in 2019/18 and 2020/21 (in million GBP).

BackgroundThere are many health benefits since 31 years after the foundation of the National Health Service (NHS) in Brazil, especially the increase in life expectancy. However, family-income inequalities, insufficient funding, and suboptimal private sector–public sector collaboration are still areas for improvement. The efforts of Brazil to achieve universal health coverage (UHC) for medicines have resulted in increased public financing of medicines and their availability, reducing avoidable hospitalization and mortality. However, lack of access to medicines still remains. Due to historical reasons, pharmaceutical service organization in developing countries may have important differences from high-income countries. In some cases, developing countries finance and promote medicine access by using the public infrastructure of health care/medical units as dispensing sites and cover all costs of medicines dispensed. In contrast, many high-income countries use private community pharmacies and cover the costs of medicines dispensed plus a fee, which includes all logistic costs. In this study, we will undertake an economic evaluation to understand the funding needs of the Brazilian NHS to reduce inequalities in access to medicines through adopting a pharmaceutical service organization similar to that seen in many high-income countries with hiring/accrediting private pharmacies.MethodsWe performed an economic evaluation of a model to provide access to medicines within public funds based on a decision tree model with two alternative scenarios public pharmacies (NHS, state-owned facilities) versus private pharmacies (NHS, agreements). The analysis assumed the perspective of the NHS. We identified the types of resources consumed, the amount, and costs in both scenarios. We also performed a budget impact forecast to estimate the incremental funding required to reduce inequalities in access to essential medicines in Brazil.FindingsThe model without rebates for medicines estimated an incremental cost of US$3.1 billion in purchasing power parity (PPP) but with an increase in the average availability of medicines from 65% to 90% for citizens across the country irrespective of family income. This amount places the NHS in a very good position to negotiate extensive rebates without the need for external reference pricing for government purchases. Forecast scenarios above 35% rebates place the alternative of hiring private pharmacies as dominant. Higher rebate rates are feasible and may lead to savings of more than US$1.3 billion per year (30%). The impact of incremental funding is related to medicine access improvement of 25% in the second year when paying by dispensing fee. The estimate of the incremental budget in five years would be US$4.8 billion PPP. We have yet to explore the potential reduction in hospital and outpatient costs, as well as in lawsuits, with increased availability with the yearly expenses for these at US$9 billion and US$1.4 billion PPP respectively in 2017.InterpretationThe results of the economic evaluation demonstrate potential savings for the NHS and society. Achieving UHC for medicines reduces household expenses with health costs, health litigation, outpatient care, hospitalization, and mortality. An optimal private sector–public sector collaboration model with private community pharmacy accreditation is economically dominant with a feasible medicine price negotiation. The results show the potential to improve access to medicines by 25% for all income classes. This is most beneficial to the poorest families, whose medicines account for 76% of their total health expenses, with potential savings of lives and public resources.

Community pharmacies can provide the NHS vaccination against seasonal influenza. The statistics in this release only includes those eligible for a seasonal flu vaccine funded by the NHS, who received it at a community pharmacy. It does not include anyone who was eligible and had it provided through a general practice or anyone who paid for a vaccine privately at the pharmacy. Data shows the location of previous seasonal flu vaccine (SFV) for those patients who received an NHS-funded vaccination in the financial year. Data is based on claims made by pharmacies for the services provided.

This publication reports on Outpatient activity in England for the financial year 2023-24. This report includes but is not limited to analysis of hospital outpatient appointments by patient demographics, diagnoses, attendance type, operations, specialty and provider level analysis. It describes NHS outpatient appointments in England, rather than the number of patients. The purpose of this publication is to inform and support strategic and policy-led processes for the benefit of patient care and may also be of interest to researchers, journalists and members of the public interested in NHS hospital activity in England. The data source for this publication is Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), which come from the HES data warehouse containing details of all admissions and outpatient appointments at National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England. It includes private patients treated in NHS hospitals, patients who were resident outside of England and care delivered by treatment centres (including those in the independent sector) funded by the NHS. Please send queries or feedback via email to enquiries@nhsdigital.nhs.uk. Author: Secondary Care Open Data and Publications, NHS England. Lead Analyst: Karl Eichler.