NHS bill to cure dandruff could pay for 1,200 hip replacements

Figures reveal the millions spent on remedies of ‘low clinical value’ that could be better spent elsewhere

THE NHS spends £12 million a year prescribing anti-dandruff shampoos and indigestion remedies.

Figures revealed last night show that the service is paying millions of pounds on readily-available over-the-counter remedies including £5.5million a year to cure mouth ulcers.

These are among thousands of treatments that doctors are now being told to stop funding so that the money saved can go on cancer and mental health.

Bosses are trying to find £136million to divert into front-line care. They say £4.5million spent on curing dandruff could pay for 4,700 more cataract operations or 1,200 hip replacements. And £7.5million spent on indigestion and heartburn could instead employ 300 more community nurses.

Under proposals, the NHS would favour these rather than drugs or procedures that have “low clinical value”, as well as conditions that cure themselves, such as sore throats, colds, or indigestion. Managers argue that many drugs can be bought over the counter at lower prices than the NHS has to pay.

But some patient groups say the proposals would hit the country’s more vulnerable people. Last month NHS England announced plans to tackle its £9billion annual drugs bill by targeting the £640 million it spends on medicines that do not need prescribing.

More than 3,000 products will no longer be funded and GPS have been ordered to stop routinely funding remedies for 36 conditions.

Dr Graham Jackson, who co-chairs NHS Clinical Commissioners, said: “It is important that we have an honest conversation with the public, patients and clinicians about what the NHS should and can provide.”

The Royal College of GPS, which represents the doctors who will be most affected, said patients should buy their medicines where they could afford to, but argued against “blanket bans” on NHS funding.

Professor Helen Stokes-lampard, its chairman, said GPS must “retain the right to make clinical decisions about prescribing appropriately for our patients based on the unique physical, psychological and social factors potentially impacting on their health”.

The Patients Association said the funding proposals risked rendering GP appointments “more like benefits assessments”. Rachel Power, its chief executive, said: “Applying this principle to the complex needs of patients in the real world, without causing many to lose out for all sorts of reasons, will be extremely difficult.”

Matina Loizou, of the Prescription Charges Coalition, which campaigns to abolish “unfair prescription charges”, said NHS England had “decided to play the role of Scrooge this Christmas by launching this cruel consultation”.