The 'adding up' relates to paying hospital trusts, and 2ry care in general, whether or not they see patients. Trusts argue that the overheads remain and are increasing so allocate increasing proportions of their budget, leaving a smaller proportion for clinical services. They are then unable to replace staff, who can't see patients, so waiting lists increase.
The NHS commissions 2ry care to do less and less with more and more money, whilst claiming credit as they have moved services into the community, ie forced GPs to cope with more and more, on an ever smaller propotion of the budget.
If the piper payer calls the tune, who do these data officers work for?
Unusually I think that this could be good.
It will be useful to have a recording of the consultation. This can help to defend us from some of the wilder complaints and accusations.
The interpretation will be poor speech recognition to start with. The hope that is placed in AI is quite deluded, and demonstrates such a lack of awareness of the healthcare process that it suggests a high degree of contempt for what we do.
is it for with meals or between meals?
could the headline be a little different?
It should be something which explains where the blame lies...
GMC fails, Again!
GMC to do work it claimed to have done 20 years ago
GMC probity in question, again
GMC brings profession into disrepute
If any one is looking NHS England figures are to be found somewhere between game of thrones and lord of the rings in the fantasy fiction section of the library.
Its all right, following a SAR I sent to PCSE it seems they are only 'data processors' in relation to pensions and not 'data controllers'. As a result they don't have to respond to Subject access requests.
I did ask if they would refund the money that they have been paid for managing the pensions, but they didn't answer that one.
I have sent a complaint to PCSE, and intend to follow it up with the ICO after an appropriate timescale.
it would “not be credible” for him to sit as an independent'.
does any more need saying?
Interesting to see that Baby-Lon have put their 'medical' director up to speak.
It is often that role which is left holding the responsibility when the other directors are ....
It does seem that not only does he not understand the health service, but that he has no understanding of required standards of public life, or even of the subtleties of politics.
It is almost as if he is the son the family didn't want in the family business so put in to a bought parliamentary seat 'to keep him out of mischief'. Unfortunately any one with any talent in the ruling party seems to be keeping their head down (I'm sure there must be some...)
Hairdressing salons across the country are closing down. The Hairdressers are being forced out of business by a new technology combined with a bigger is best mantra.
Economies of scale mean that in a large chain of hairdressers only one administrator can track all the qualifications of the stylists, book all the appointments and make tea and sweep up in all the salons across the whole country.
At the same time Hairdresser at hand and Barberon are competing to develop a new paradigm in coiffure. The online barbarism apps allow the young, fit, and hirsute to have their own selection of cranial topiary, martini style.
Traditional barbers and stylists in quaint back street chop shops are being outpaced by this disruptive technology. Ed the scissors said " young people will miss us when we're gone the knowledge we have of which way their parting goes is indispensable."
Spokesperson for Barberon states that 85% of hair dos can be done online. He seriously intends to sell his stake in the business for several million. He has advised his investors in a clear regulatory statement that 'there is absolutely no way you will make any money from this in your lifetime. Look we can only pay the day to day bills by stealing the cash from the cafe next door, and trading barber poles on the second hand market.'
Hairdressing regulators and trades descriptions officers have been accused of taking bribes. They have repeatedly stated that online haircutting is a matter for the clients and that if the national hairdressing budget is all syphoned off to panama it will not have been their fault.
Wicileeks was unable to cover the story due to current legal difficulties. Private eye did a 16 page spread, attracting the disbelief of hundreds of political watchers, but who forgot about it after their next editorial meeting.
Oh no you made me look...
The authors seem to have assumed that drugs issued caused no harm!
They didn't identify harms relating to drugs
which were changed.
...or any of the multiple reasons why senna, morphine, zopiclone, paracetamol, and oxycodone should not have been recommended by anyone in the first place..
I would call for a follow up piece where they look at how many of these recommendations were actually contraindicated based on the comprehensive (well it can be/used to be) lifelong primary care record.
I hope this statistic is not an example of believing your own hype.
The paid for opinion piece submitted to the ccg to justify expansion by this organisation was not an effective smokescreen. It merely stated its assertions as above, then justified them by saying that some people (slightly more than 5) on facebook gave positive reviews.
If you want to make up stats, at least make them believable!
It might be a good idea to take any pay off early. The chance of share options being of value is limited. Perhaps if there is a buyout?
Might be worth not burning too many bridges..
The influence of a sales rep lasts as long as there is a 'mark' who wants what is being sold. The 'Hancock' is and ideal mark, deluded and in need of shiny wares to 'impress' others.
His civil servants are happy to support the 'rep' at present, as he serves their purposes; to depower the medical profession and ensure that they are in charge. Unfortunately they don't quite realise that without the medical profession there is no health service to be in charge of.
the report says that they could use the service, in the opinion of the writer, who was paid by GP at hand to say that the homeless could use the service. So that is alright then.
Is there a diversity breakdown of cqc inspectors, non clinical and clinical?
I'm sure that the headline is not justified by the content of the connected paper. The paper takes eds2 criteria and then does a literature review of all the difficulties people with these characteristics have in accessing 'standard' GP practices.
These are balanced with the author's opinion that the app 'does'nt have this problem'. The only actual evidence is that there are 23 LD patients registered out of ?several thousand! and several 5 star reviews on facebook!
Maybe there is another paper, but the one linked above is a paid for opinion piece in the style 'I like monster munch because they are cheesy and smiley and taste great'.
whatever they do it probably isn't general practice
important point re adverts! 'a highly selective digital based organisation' is trying to take on 'a locally based, intimately connected organisation' in a competition to drive primary care (previously general practice) into bankruptcy taking the NHS with it.