@Christopher Ho - I have some sympathy for your views but regarding the point about the remuneration/working conditions of doctors, would you anticipate things being better or worse in a private medical system? I can easily see doctors employed by the likes of Virgin Care and reduced to peons employed on contracts less favourable than current salaried GPs in terms of pay and needing to answer to non-clinical thickos with clipboards.
On the other hand, we have the USA as a point of comparison where primary care physicians/GPs do very well compared to UK GPs financially but they complain about lacking autonomy and the USA is the world's strongest economy with commensurate incomes.
Perhaps what would work best would be a private small business/chambers model with patients seeking out a GP for medical care for a fee-by-activity (whether that's pay as you go or insured) service. Even in this case, I think the question of whether working conditions would improve depends on a toss of the die. There's a lot of uncertainty in the move to a private system for doctors and not at all clear we would derive a net benefit.
From where will these suitably qualified doctors and nurses be recruited? From the understaffed OOH service or from Jeremy Hunt's lost legion of 5,000 GPs?
A terrible unsafe idea. Unimaginably worse if the GP has to call A&E to make a referral and seek permission from the SpR/consultant to send in a patient.
What a tin-pot/tin-foil hat committee - Health and Sport! Such an insulting assumption that GPs throw prescriptions at patients. As for the idea that there isn't regulation - what about the GMC, the solicitors and the coroner's court? Scotland is better off for not having NHSE and the CCQ but I'm sure there's a complaints body as well.
If faced with the prospect of being a GP in salaried service to the government, I'd simply emigrate.
As a Scottish GP I have never had to have a CQC inspection and reading about the problems in England am very glad of it. NHS England could always review if Scottish practices are suffering in any way from not being inspected|
Pretty sure NHSE would say you are suffering horribly!
Professor Gerada - who herself overcame coronavirus early on - said this comes as GP mental health was already 'very poor' even before the pandemic
She said: 'Going into the pandemic GPs were exhausted, burnt out, demoralised and depressed. The impact of Covid will only exacerbate these problems as is already evident by referrals to our service.'
Is this a genuine assessment of the impact of Covid on General Practice or a crypto-obfuscatory cover up of the fact that the switch to majority telephone consultations has made our day-to-day working life more tolerable ;-)
The logical conclusion of proposing to suspend CQC inspections by 1 year or 2 years to benefit GPs is to shut down the organisation completely as then the benefit will be perpetual. Any GPs working for the CQC ought to be ashamed of themselves and seek out some honest patient-facing work instead, or failing that, take up gardening.
These NHSE webinars remind me of the apocrypha of the Bible. The annual GMS contract revisions are the equivalent of the (annually updated) gospels and the webinar pronouncements are the additional prophetic contributions that good believers may or may not choose to accept. Stop attempting to impose policy in this way, it's unacceptable. Any changes to GP workload ought to occur through the GPC's toothless annual negotiations, not added on each week via the internet under the martial law pretext of Covid-19.
Is the source for Philosopher 1's claim that German GPs see 50 patients per day 5 days per week (250 in total) the Brothers Grimm?
Nice use by NHSE of Covid-19 as a martial law mechanism for foisting this rubbish PCN service specification on GPs 5 months before the planned date.
Covid-19, of which there are currently 3,269 confirmed cases in the UK, is being described as the ‘greatest global health threat’ in a century
A bigger threat than cardiovascular disease (or a long list of other diseases)?
Not to trivialise the coronavirus but the pandemic I'd fear would have the transmission rate of measles with the fatality rate of ebola.
carfentanyl | GP Partner/Principal13 Mar 2020 6:13pm
'Corona Charlies' - LOL! Unfortunately for them there will be too many for these individuals to achieve the same notoriety/immortality as Typhoid Mary.
Glad not to be a member of the NHS pension scheme, investing in a SIPP instead which can be accessed 10 years before the state pension age, total transparency, tax deductible contributions, and zero input from Crapita.
Close down the CQC stat - boost GP morale, recruitment and retention and it won't cost a penny, in fact it'll save taxpayer's money.
Mark Howson - absolutely, refer the CCG to the ICO.
Also well done Dr Shashikanth for going to the media/telling Pulse about this issue, a good political move when politics are being played on you.
A radical positive change for GP partners would be for the employer's contributions to be directly funded by NHSE (I realise that allegedly this is covered by the global sum but in reality this is a farce given the inadequacy of the global sum). This is the main factor stopping me from joining the NHS pension scheme and taking a chance on the byzantine tax laws and the threat of endless tinkering. Is there really any point joining this scheme as a partner when you pay a massive 28% of your profit share into the pension??
Good work Dr Bryant.
1. Would the pharmacists arrange follow up bloods?
2. Would the pharmacist see the patient if side effects develop?
3. Is there any patient demand for bypassing the GP in this way? I can see the appeal with obtaining viagra over the counter but statins?!
Klavio | Doctor in Training24 Jul 2019 6:06pm
I for sure will give a crap to UK and will leave the country for good, once I pass this Crap exam.
Care to clarify this comment about your intention to 'give a crap to UK'? It sounds incredibly disrespectful and hostile.
Introducing a MRCP-level of rigour into General Practice would be very beneficial for GPs and patients alike but two major problems with this:
1. The sheer amount of time taken to perform a thorough examination would demand an extension of the 10 minute consultation.
2. MRCP only pertains to medicine!! How would this qualification assess a GP's competence in dealing with cases based on O&G, gynaecology, paediatrics, mental health, orthopaedics, general surgery, ENT, ophthalmology, etc, etc? Put a vaunted medical consultant in a room with a child, a pregnant woman, a woman with period problems, a bipolar patient, a patient with an ambiguous skin lesion etc, etc and see them squirm.
Clearly Lyme needs treatment from the clinical point of view. But also in terms of potential patient hassle over refusing antibiotics, you'd be crazy not to treat as Lyme generates fundamentalist passions in patients even more than thyroid disorders.