This is gimmickry, of course.
From the healthcare practitioner’s perspective it is at best useless and more likely distracting and anxiety fuelling.
RWT however get the power to remotely spy on their employees whilst Babylon stoke the fires of the illness obsessed and wean them on to the septic tit of consumer driven healthcare.
Once again, patients and practitioners are the bloodied pawns to be sacrificed in this opening gambit. Where has the common sense gone?
First area to scrutinise is: what is the percentage of trainees achieving CCT?
Anecdotally, my experience and that of other local trainers is that the rate of dropout from GP training and failure has never been higher.
There is little to cheer about if those extra entrants never qualify.
The problem involves fluoxetine and the Prof is banging on about citalopram.
Good grief, if you can’t even get that right what chance have we got.
Any care pathway in which a call handler can overrule the opinion of a trained clinician at the side of the patient risks this happening.
And again both yesterday and today EMIS is unavailable at random moments through the day, returning for a few seconds then failing to connect again. This is both a clinical risk and an onerous burden for staff
And yesterday and again today EMIS is unavailable intermittently and causing further frustration. This is completely unacceptable and an avoidable source of potential harm to patients.
And yet again, in Staffordshire, Docman and EMIS are unavailable. That’s more than 100 lapses in our NHS provided IT systems this year alone.
It’s nigh on impossible to digitally innovate when our enforced tech infrastructure is so poor. Our Skype trial was abandoned by unworkable internet speeds. Local IT blocks many useful third party sites and local software updates are often poorly thought out and lead to losses of service.
The personal internet that we have as a practice works seamlessly- the NHS provided internet connection, which we’re forced to use, is appalling.
Simply not good enough that the RCGP think that it is ‘ambitious’ to take 11 years to make workloads manageable.
12 overseas GPs recruited per year? Not exactly time to fist pump and high-five then.
Multiple points of contact, whether that be multiple GPs, ANPs, OOH or clinical pharmacists adds to the patient churn.
Churn is not in the best interest of patients nor an efficient health service. It’s the division of a problem into 3,4 or more separate problems- each dutifully attended to by a different healthcare professional. It adds to the confusion experiences by the patient and magnifies the problem- it creates new problems.
We need to move away from more illness identification and modelling health around disease promotion but it takes a relationship, trust and understanding of the person before you to do this. A 10 minute fumble with someone unfamiliar does not lend itself well to this. Continuity of care is a necessity and is sorely lacking in today’s drive-thru style medical world.
The appalling nature of NHS IT both within and adjoining our practice is putting our patients and personal
careers at risk. It is utterly unreliable and lacks oversight.
IT failure played a role in Jack Adcock’s case. It’s only a matter of time before it is repeated in primary care.
Is this just my experience or yours too?
Patient satisfaction is not a reliable indicator of high quality patient care. It’s an indicator that the expectation of the patient was modified, satisfied or both.
It is as much reliant upon the performance of factors outside of my control than it is of what I say or do within the consultation.
EMIS not working? Poor feedback.
Pharmacy haven’t got the medication prescribed? Poor feedback.
Haven’t got the hospital correspondence? Poor feedback.
Can’t prescribe the OTC medication? Poor feedback. Patient walks in, demands to be seen for convenience and is booked at a more reasonable time as scant resources are already thin? Poor feedback.
All of the above are real world examples that I’ve experienced.
Just keep that in mind before tears are shed over throw-away comments or grudge-banter.
No reason that each scan can’t automatically input drug name, batch number and expiry date into the electronic patient record, thus potentially saving some clinician time.
Whilst I support endeavours to enhance patient safety, right now my main concern about medication is the supply of key medicines. I now spend 15-30 mins every day dealing with out of stock medications and looking for work-arounds.
The scheme is immoral and shortsighted but I doubt it can be successfully legally challenged. The GMS contract is, of course, held by the participating practices and GP at Hand is simply contracted by them to provide an additional service for the contract holders.
I wish the practices luck in attending to the demands of their newly swollen practice lists. I’ll be interested to see how out-of-area home visits are satisfactorily dealt with, how they maintain continuity and balance safe against resource-efficient care.
Consumer driven primary care is gathering pace and whilst the Babylon/AI approach is superficially appealing for patients I fear that the byproduct will be a 24/7 churn of diagnoses and prescriptions, to the detriment of our health service and patient wellbeing.
What we should be focusing on is creating an appealing alternative which places the wellbeing of patients at its core, rather than sifting NHS money into the private sector.
If your view is contrary to popular opinion, expect to receive critical comments. That's simply the consequence of publishing in a public arena.
To suggest that opinion is more favourably offered to certain sexes or certain aged contributors is misguided- where's your evidence?
I strongly feel that Pulse should not have facilitated this article- in my opinion it adds nothing to the GP community, it's not newsworthy and it portrays a 'new face of General Practice' as puerile and vitriolic. Poor show all round.