key part is it uses the patients phone, they know what we look like (doesn't need to be two way most of the time)
Patients without tech, or who can't use tech are getting left behind
Does need bandwidth and that is limited
straight from the 'horse's mouth' if you'd like
other approaches for ppe include;
1 local hospital trusts(some have been asked to manage the local area supply);
2 some ccgs are helping to coordinate local supplies (sometimes via step 1);
Look on your clinical system; the search is there for emis practices I don't know about other systems.
'The letter' is going out centrally, but you need to know who your patients are if they start ringing.
Emis has a popup too.
'The centre' think they know who these patients are, but their info may be ....'not quite right' ?
I'm sure that this message is not clear enough.
All funding that is available needs to be cleared of 'signing up' or 'KPI' measurement.
Yes practices will need to wrk together, but they need to work that out in their own locally appropriate way not from any central dictat.
Clear these hurdles and you might even find you get more out of primary care than you asked for!!
Is advice only clear when you agree with it?
There is a lot which is unclear and unknown, but the advice is what it is.
There will always be gaps, or difficulties in following advice, but now might be a time to try to work with your own team to decide what steps you need within the guidance given.
We all need to work to pragmatic practice, patient and staff centered solutions
'we have commissioned a new service'
Why would you not use services already in place?
Any new service will not have manpower or infrastructure in place, unless it takes it from other already stretched services.
Has NHS England got a significant blind spot around primary and community care?
Which elephant out of the whole herd is producing the most?
There seems little space left in this room for all the elephants.
They are perhaps Emporer Hancock's new elephants as it seems everyone who isn't in the bubble can see them.
There is good evidence that GPs have no effect on emergency department attendance.
The data is already collected.
So it is to be made even more available than it already is.
I'm with the gallic shrug gang on this one.
Of course, the rest of the 2020/21 planning guidance....
the digital 'consultation' made clear that obstacles will be cleared to make this loss making clinically unsafe service the new normal.
The investors and employees of this organisation are buying their way through the safety legislation with borrowed money.
They feel that a blank cheque is waiting at the end of their development phase.
That might be that they relocate to another country once the guinea pigs have all been stuffed, and thrown on the tip.
In other news, the SPAD DC is in no way influenced by his role in this organisation.
There seems to be a significant degree of cognitive dissonance involved above. There seems to be belief that Einstein was wrong and doing the same thing again will somehow produce a different result.
If you genuinely want a 'small state' then you probably need to consider what job you are going to do. Medicine at the levels we have in the UK will not continue.
But then you guys are special and will be the chosen few?
I find it heartbreaking that people are so cynical as to deny the needs of the poor and unwell just in case someone might be getting a pittance in benefits incorrectly.
No one who is on benefits feels that they are well off, anyone who wants to live on them is someone with too many problems to begin to understand.
Why is it so hard to support the poor and sick?
The article suggests that the system is generating work unnecessarily for no-one's benefit, and simply to harm many of the poorest and most vulnerable.
On a separate point, the biggest group of people dependant on state handouts, who receive the most money, have no checks on eligibility.
...so if health care inflation is actually closer to 15 % than 7%, it will only be a really big drop in funding instead of a massive one...
Was this announcement made by the same NHS England which reminded all NHS organisations that they should
'consider that public announcements of policy and strategy which may be politically sensitive should not be made during the pre-election period.'
As their remit does not include clinical quality what is the rule which they use to permit this kind of action?
The first two practices have been under the care of the PCT before the existence of CCGs. The CWP is a mental health and community NHS trust, so whilst it runs some inpatient facilities it is mostly about mental health care.
Having had a practice contract returned the commissioner is required to tender for a new provider before awarding such a contract. It would seem that this process has been quite brief and quiet?
Is it possible to prove that 'guidelines' improve patient survival?
Has the question been asked or answered?
Visiting a hospital in another corner of the world there was in the doctor's office a drawer filled with pills. All the colours of the rainbow, old new, certainly not stored in optimum conditions. These could be searched through to find one suitable for the current patient.
I don't know that the available pill informed the diagnosis, 'this week we will have epilepsy as we have antiepilleptics'; 'This week we are seeing a lot of hayfever as we have antihistamines'.
Important subject, might have been more GP focused in this publication.
In particular the point that we GPs don't get the information in time to act on it!
Also that many GPs around 50 may be subject to this even if not over the £110000 if the growth in the pension fund has been 'estimated' to be to high. This can happen if Capita fail to deposit a change in payments in the correct year!
Have NWIS identified the problems with their procurement which resulted in excluding the most qualified products?
Do they realise that these are problems, or are they framing them as opportunities?
opportunity 1 to stimulate the market
opportunity 2 to encourage innovation
opportunity 3 to break general practice by enforcing a massive unnecessary change on an industry with no financial flexibility