The inverse care law is alive and well!
How does this help the homeless? The frail elderly? Those with learning disabilities?
Our system should be geared around those with the greatest need not the worried well in Islington.
Inverse care law Minister?
Imagine...imagine if everything going into your practice was doubled. Twice as many doctors, twice as many nurses, appointments twice as long. Would you be sitting around twiddling your thumbs or going home at lunchtime? No? I think I would just about be able to practice medicine to the standard I would hope for for myself or my family. I might have time to take proper notes, think about my patients, do things properly. It’s a sad reflection of just how starved of resource primary care has become. It will never happen though because in the politicians eyes it would just be a massive drop in ‘efficiency’...
All very good but 40000 patients is probably the equivalent of 4-5 full time GPs, especially given these are simple consultations...so how much did the scheme cost minister?
‘GPs and nurses could be trained to perform hysteroscopy’
Yeah, ‘cos it’s not like we’ve got anything else to do right now...
Hang on, 41.5 x 10 minute appointments = 415 minutes of consulting vs 25 x 15 minute appointments = 375 minutes/day. A whole 40 minutes saved per day! I left the surgery at 8.45 last night. Maybe I'll get away at 8 if I'm lucky?
"Pressure not sustainable...actions not words"
Maybe the action should be scrapping the requirement for primary care to be open 8-8 seven days a week (non-evidence based policy) and investing the savings in core services?
Do they have any idea how many people we see with vague symptoms? What this shows is not that they all need blood tests but that sometimes medicine can be quite hard!
Whilst I realise flu vaccination is a source of valuable income for practices it seems crazy that something so important from a public health point of view is left to practice's commercial decisions when it comes to how much vaccine to order nearly a year in advance. Surely there must be a better way of doing this, especially when it comes to ordering different things for different age groups?
Amazed they got ethical approval for this...
I can feel an FOI request coming on, maybe 'could NHSE/CCG supply a copy of the equality impact assessment which was hopefully undertaken as part of the procurement process?'
Fee? I'd like a refund...
There is a distinct lack of accountability around STPs. Does anyone know who they're accountable to or what the mechanisms for holding them to account are? They are, after all, spending public money...
My reading of this was that the MDOs have to make some prediction of what future payouts will be and today's announcement has affected the MDU's view of that. I would expect they know more than we do about the detail as they will have been consulted by the DH...
Problem is which 26% are "avoidable"?
Many of the patients I see require little or no intervention but it often takes someone with some professional training and a willingness to accept some degree of risk to be able to tell which are which. This is our entire job Mr Hunt.
To paraphrase Churchill, give us the money and we'll do the job
This really isn't that surprising. At the beginning of the financial year CCGs set their budgets. They make an educated guess as to what they will spend in each area. At the end of the year some of these areas will be overspent and some will be underspent. This is not a conspiracy, it just reflects the difficulty of predicting what you'll spend.
Presumably the fire crews will be CQC registered, inspected etc?
The 2.4bn is not for practices. It is for 'primary care'. It will be spent on unproven 'at scale' projects. Don't expect to see any anytime soon.
Sarah Wollaston is not a GP. The GMC website lists her as being registered without a licence to practise. I thought this was meant to be a list of 'influential GPs' rather than ex-GPs???