Portsmouth's withdrawal scuppers local pathology plan

The trust had been developing plans with University Hospitals Southampton Foundation Trust and Isle of Wight Trust to provide pathology services collectively to eliminate variations in quality and cut costs by a quarter.

However this summer, after more than two years’ work, Portsmouth brought in Deloitte to conduct a “forensic” review of the plans.

The trust, which has not published Deloitte’s findings, said the report found the risks around staff transfers and IT investment outweighed the potential benefits of the scheme.

Peter Mellor, Portsmouth’s director of corporate affairs and business development, told HSJ the main concern was that only one member of the consortium would act as host – University Hospitals Southampton.

Mr Mellor said the concerns would have applied whichever trust had been host.

But, he added, Portsmouth remained committed to a local pathology consortium, hopefully involving more trusts, and set up as a separate entity in which all the partners have a shareholding.

Portsmouth’s withdrawal provoked anger and bemusement in the Hampshire health economy, not least because staff had been due to transfer to Southampton this month.

Stuart Ward, medical director for the Wessex area team of NHS England, said Portsmouth’s withdrawal “came completely out of the blue”. He added: “It was the first we’d heard about any concerns, and we had no idea why they have decided to do that.”

Portsmouth’s board announced its decision in a message sent out to the staff of all three trusts on 27 September. The message said: “This particular model was not in the best interests of our patients.” However, the Portsmouth board “fully recognised all of the hard work undertaken by the pathology consortium to date and looks forward to future collaboration with hospital trusts throughout the south east to secure a long term model for sustainable pathology services.”

But one well placed local source told HSJ: “With two years’ effort wasted I can’t see anyone wanting to step back in when Portsmouth have done this to this well formed group.”

The source added that the idea of setting up a separate entity was a “red herring”, and that having one trust as host did not confer special privileges onto that organisation.