Brief
Skip to main content Skip to navigation Close dialogue 1 / 1 Next image Previous image Toggle caption Print subscriptions Search jobs Sign in Eur Europe edition UK edition US edition Australia edition International edition The Guardian - Back to home The Guardian News Opinion Sport Culture Lifestyle Show more Hide expanded menu News View all News World news UK news Climate crisis Ukraine Environment Science Global development Football Tech Business Obituaries Opinion View all Opinion The Guardian view Columnists Cartoons Opinion videos Letters Sport View all Sport Football Cricket Rugby union Tennis Cycling F1 Golf US sports Culture View all Culture Books Music TV & radio Art & design Film Games Classical Stage Lifestyle View all Lifestyle Fashion Food Recipes Love & sex Health & fitness Home & garden Women Men Family Travel Money Search input google-search Search Support us Print subscriptions Search jobs Holidays Digital Archive Guardian Licensing Live events About Us The Guardian app Video Podcasts Pictures Newsletters Today's paper Inside the Guardian Guardian Weekly Crosswords Wordiply Corrections Tips Search input google-search Search Search jobs Holidays Digital Archive Guardian Licensing Live events About Us UK UK politics Education Media Society Law Scotland Wales Northern Ireland GPs say they have had to re-register vulnerable and older patients who have been removed from practice lists in error. Photograph: Julian Claxton/Alamy View image in fullscreen GPs say they have had to re-register vulnerable and older patients who have been removed from practice lists in error. Photograph: Julian Claxton/Alamy NHS ‘Ghost patient’ policy wrongly removing at-risk people from GP lists, doctors say NHS England initiative to reduce cut-off period to three months ‘disproportionately affecting’ most deprived areas Tobi Thomas Health and inequalities correspondent Wed 23 Sep 2026 10.00 CEST Last modified on Wed 23 Sep 2026 10.26 CEST Share Prefer the Guardian on Google An NHS policy to remove “ghost patients” from GP lists is inadvertently leaving some of the poorest people in England without vital healthcare, analysis has found. Under previous NHS rules, inactive patients at risk of being removed from their GP practice were given six months to respond to outreach. But under NHS England’s accelerated list validation timeline, introduced last October, patients now have only three months to reply. According to analysis by Healthtech-1, registered GP lists in English practices declined by 483,019 patients between October 2025 and July 2026, with the most deprived fifth of practices accounting for about 138,400 of the net decline – just under 30% of the national decline. While GP lists need reviewing as people move away or die, GPs have said the accelerated timeline has inadvertently led to patients from deprived areas being incorrectly removed, creating barriers to receiving treatment. Consequently, GPs and practice managers have reported having to re-register vulnerable and elderly patients, creating an additional administrative burden. De-registering patients can also cause gaps in care and disruption to treatment. Since GP practices’ income also depend on the number of registered patients, a drop can leave practices struggling to pay for running costs. A GP at a university practice in Southampton said the accelerated timeline was causing problems because patients were being incorrectly removed from their list and were struggling to access their prescriptions and treatment. “If you give prescriptions out to people, they’re on repeat and once they get kicked off the lists they can no longer access any prescriptions,” he said. “The risk is that if you’re unable to access your repeat prescriptions, your treatment will be affected.” He added: “If you’re narrowing the window from six to three months, more people are going to be kicked off and therefore more people will be put into the position where they cannot access treatment.” The GP also warned that, besides reducing a practice’s income, the policy change was hitting patients from deprived and vulnerable backgrounds hardest. GPs’ advice service is causing cancer diagnoses to be missed, inquiry finds Read more “In our case, we had around 100 people who were taken off our list who didn’t leave at all. That worked out as around £10,000 in lost income for our practice,” he said. “We were later contacted by these patients telling us that they couldn’t access their prescriptions and that they hadn’t gone anywhere. “The money we’ve lost hasn’t been compensated, and I know of another practice locally that has lost £100,000 that they also won’t be compensated for. “For those who have been erroneously taken off, we’re being penalised. We’re going to have to make cuts somehow to make up the shortfalls.” Dr Clare Bannon, the chair of the British Medical Association’s GP committee, said GPs across England support the principle of keeping patient lists accurate but the current list-cleansing process is “seriously flawed”. Bannon said: “We have called on NHS England to pause the exercise. The approach is overly aggressive, leading to practices losing tens of thousands of pounds in income and causing active patients, including vulnerable individuals, to be removed in error. “It is essential that active patients are not deprived of access to a GP through no fault of their own.” An NHS spokesperson said: “There are robust checks in place to ensure that vulnerable groups are not removed from GP lists – people are contacted through multiple different channels with the thorough processes lasting up to five months before any action is taken. “This process ensures that patient contact details are correct so that they receive vital information about screening and vaccination appointments, while ensuring NHS funding resources are allocated fairly with money no longer spent on people who do not live in England.” Explore more on these topics NHS England Health Health policy GPs news Share Reuse this content Most viewed Most viewed UK UK politics Education Media Society Law Scotland Wales Northern Ireland News Opinion Sport Culture Lifestyle Original reporting and incisive analysis, direct from the Guardian every morning Sign up for our email About us Help Complaints & corrections Contact us Tip us off SecureDrop Privacy policy Cookie policy Tax strategy Terms & conditions All topics All writers Newsletters Digital newspaper archive Bluesky Facebook Instagram LinkedIn Threads TikTok YouTube Advertise with us Search UK jobs Tips Accessibility settings Work with us Back to top © 2026 Guardian News & Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. (dcr)
Comments
No comments yet.
Sign in to comment.