New GP IT system only adopted by 10 practices so far despite £2.6m push
Exclusive Just 10 GP practices have so far adopted a new IT system hailed last year as a ‘shake-up of the GP IT market’, and despite an investment of nearly £3m by NHS England.
Medicus told Pulse that its core clinical system is live in 10 GP practices in England, but that ‘implementation projects’ are planned in 97 practices across 18 ICB areas.
NHS England approved the Medicus core clinical system in June last year, and at the time, the commissioner said that the system was already live in ‘four early-adopting sites’.
It described Medicus’ approval as the ‘first shake-up of the GP IT market in a quarter of a century’, and the provider is featured on NHS England’s Tech Innovation Framework (TIF), a list of assured IT suppliers GP practices can procure from.
It is up to practices whether they want to adopt this system as the approval gave them another option of core GP IT systems to choose from.
But the RCGP told Pulse that workload pressures and the disruption associated with changing systems could be contributing factors to the pace of the adoption, and stressed that for new systems to be successfully adopted, practices need ‘adequate support’ and ‘sufficient protected time’ to implement changes safely.
Data up to end of 2024/25, obtained via a freedom of information (FOI) request and seen by Pulse, shows NHS England paid 79 GP practices a total of £2.6m from the TIF’s early adopter budget.
This includes nearly £1.5m worth of ‘discovery payments’, worth £20,000 each for practices to receive demonstrations of what the new GP IT system but with no obligation to ultimately buy the product.
Medicus was the only provider featured on the TIF up to the end of 2024/25, and had received £1.5m in that time to feature on the framework and develop its systems.
Alongside this, the FOI revealed a total of £13.2m had been spent on ‘operational labour costs including setup, procurement, staffing, development and ongoing support of the framework.
Medicus told Pulse further practices are expected to go live with the new system in the coming months.
Medicus chief executive Emile Axelrad told Pulse: ‘GP practices across roughly half of England’s ICBs are already moving to Medicus, and we’re working towards being operational in every ICB by the end of the year.’
Some GP leaders had welcomed Medicus’ approval at the time but warned about the ‘considerable workload and disruption’ associated with changing systems.
The RCGP warned adopting new GP IT systems would be ‘a really big task for even the most tech-savvy of practices’.
RCGP chair Professor Victoria Tzortziou Brown told Pulse: ‘While we can’t be certain of all the factors influencing the pace of take-up of new IT systems in general practice, workload pressures and the disruption associated with changing systems could well be contributing factors.
‘Digital innovation has the potential to improve care for patients and support the work of practice teams, but for new systems to be successfully adopted practices need adequate support, investment in infrastructure and sufficient protected time to implement changes safely.
‘It’s important that any new technology introduced into general practice is reliable, well-tested and designed with the needs of frontline clinicians and patients in mind.’
NHS England declined to comment on the Medicus rollout and the development of the TIF.
Related Articles
READERS' COMMENTS [2]
Please note, only GPs are permitted to add comments to articles


The RCGP are absolutely right. Moving systems is a colossal pain – and I can confirm as the first practice to move to Medicus that yes, it is also a colossal pain. But that was the case moving practices to EMIS too – it’s part of the package.
Now we’ve moved I would never go back – so I hope that this programme costs more money because the work required to move is supported. The potential savings are enormous – we’ve got rid of Docman, thank god, and we’ve saved hours a day on processing routine work.
I’d love to do it personally but bringing the team along would need huge investment at the cost of patient facing activity