Date published: May 2005.

But actually in the document there seems to be some confusion between partnership, collaborative working and sponsorship; not to mention tactical versus 'strategic'….. Much in the document seems to be about the fact that the PCT would really like to get into more innovative service delivery but was finding that it had little or no monies to do this and therefore was simply looking for some extra cash. And the PCT was perfectly willing to do all this joined up stuff where activities 'aligned' (but this seems to be very much on their terms) and they would really much prefer 'bespoke' offerings, although at a pinch would take them 'off-the-shelf'… The document also suggested that very few PCTs have actively pursued the benefits of 'partnership working' but this is not strictly true. Hillingdon PCT was an early pioneer here but now has gone rather quiet and last year Durham Dales PCT appointed a similar post and this post is specifically mentioned in the document. Many other PCTs are now beginning to explore this road.

It is thus worth reminding HSJ readers that last summer the Journal carried a piece on these very same kinds of partnerships, part of the Health Hotel series of features linked to sessions at last year's party political conferences (22 July 2004, pps 18-19). The article by Kevin James of Wyeth UK specifically described some of the ethics around such partnerships as well as outlining the launch of a guide to best practice, published by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) in association with the NHS Alliance. 'The NHS and the Pharmaceutical Industry Working Together for Patients', a practical framework for joint working between the pharmaceutical industry and the NHS, also contained a number of case studies and was widely distributed within the NHS.

As always when you go to all this trouble to produce such a toolkit you want to know how it went down. So it is of great interest then that some results just in from a market research survey carried out by VIA International show that the Framework has gone down very well indeed within the NHS with the feedback largely very positive. This probably explains why the document has had to be reprinted. The research was part of VIA's annual PCO Survey and consisted of structured in-depth telephone interviews with 100 PCO decision-makers across the UK. The sample covered included Chief Executives, Clinical Directors, Commissioning Directors, Prescribing Leads, as well as Pharmaceutical Advisers. The survey was sponsored by various companies who were very interested to learn how decision-makers rated the industry folk they met as well as attempting to get an update on their views and new insights into how and when partnerships work best. Also general relationships with the industry were explored as well as the opportunities, benefits and issues around joint working.

Awareness of the Framework amongst those interviewed was nearly 90% and when asked how likely were they to use the Framework for future working with the industry on a scale of 1-6 (where 6 was very likely and 1 was very unlikely) the mean score was 4.3. 22% of those asked gave 6 as a score. As regards the overall impressions of the document, 66% were positive, with 27% saying it provided useful guidelines for both sides. Some 34% of those asked were negative, with 9% saying it did not tell them anything new/should have gone further.

Amongst the many comments made was that the Framework contained useful guidelines for both sides and that it would encourage/enable partnerships to progress - although quite a few PCTs had their own set of guidelines and some said that these simply reinforced these. Other comments made were that the Framework also clearly showed boundaries and responsibilities; was straight forward and user friendly; was sensible, workable and fair; gave good examples of published work to refer to and some had used the guidelines on joint working projects. However a smaller number of those asked said they still remained somewhat suspicious of the industry with single comments also given that the PCT does not work with the industry and that the Framework was 'written by the industry for the industry'.

The ABPI's NHS Task Force aims to continue to collect further examples of this kind of joint working to add to the Framework. Thus a second series of examples where companies and NHS organisations are conducting joint working projects will be commissioned and distributed to all NHS organisations during 2005. Governing such joint working is the industry code of practice so it is worth also pointing out that an 'NHS Guide to the Code of Practice' was distributed widely to the NHS in 2004, including to many Chief Executives. Note too please that consultation on a major review of the ABPI Code of Practice is also currently underway. See www.abpi.org.uk

In terms of a general summary of the VIA survey, it was found that PCO's agenda and priorities continue to change and develop as the political landscape changes (well hardly not a surprise!) and that the pharmaceutical industry is seen to offer support across a wide range of issues. Lots of joint initiatives were taking place and the benefits of working with the Industry were perceived by more PCO decision makers than in previous years. There was also a change in understanding of the need for the so-called 'win-win.' And it seemed that as the perceived level of relationship with companies becomes more strategic, then 'performance scores' increased. So who is for partnership then?

This article appeared in an abbreviated form in the Health Service Journal of 24th March 2005 (page 21).