This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

David O'Hagan

  • Patients across whole county set to consult with GPs electronically

    David O'Hagan's comment 17 Jul 2018 2:33pm

    It would be useful to publicize the impact assessment describing how you ensure that disadvantaged groups are not further discriminated against by this new service.

    There are many who feel that this analysis demonstrates that introducing this service is unethical. If your analysis has a different answer please share it so that we can all learn.

    The results of your pilot study should really be published to ensure that there is no unconscious bias in your interpretation of the results. For example How did the patients unable to use econsult fare? Did they feel that access was improved by this service? Was it easier for a homeless person to use than traditional General Practice?

    What were the satisfaction scores of patients who never contacted the practice? What was the awareness of patients regularly using services like?

    If you could let us see the analysis it would allay the fears of many specialist primary care consultants with many years experience who are a little skeptical at times about this particular 'new' technology.

  • NHS England plans for GPs to test patients before prescribing antibiotics

    David O'Hagan's comment 16 Jul 2018 9:37am

    of course with all the extra diagnostic tests they already do in hospital that must mean they treat less people with antibiotics empirically? Is this what is found when it has been measured?..... oh you didn't measure that yet, .....and actually after all the tests they still treat too many

  • Why general practice should embrace the NHS App

    David O'Hagan's comment 03 Jul 2018 9:10am

    Is it asking too much that you think for a few seconds before trumpeting your master's latest distraction?

    The history of UK General Practice has been one of innovation and development especially in IT. It has worked much more effectively in the UK because it has been championed by small independent businesses. These have had an incentive to make and then evolve systems which actually work.

    At the time in the 90s, development has seemed slow, but the electronic records in general practice are patient centred in a way the the fortune spent on the NHS IT project never could. Even now 20-30 years later hospital IT is a long way behind.

    This announcement is nothing of the sort. The ability to access appointments on line is already in place. The aim of this announcement is therefore not to inform the public about its existence.

    What is the reason? Could it be to have a 'good news' story to help celebrate 70 years of the NHS. 70+ years of opposition to publicly funded accessible equity driven health care delivery from the conservative party and from money/profit driven individuals.

    Government ministers are responsible to the crown and to the people. They are not supposed to be responsible to a small group of wealthy companies, and individuals. Those elected representatives may claim accountability, but the upper chamber is supposed to champion experience, and wisdom.

  • 11,000 patients forced to find new GP as four more practices close

    David O'Hagan's comment 04 Jun 2018 3:25pm

    Unscepted, these were the APMS practices, they still couldn't make it work.

    2-3 % of Livepool population so may not cause too much of a domino effect yet.

  • No f___ing appointments, but we can offer you an e-consultation

    David O'Hagan's comment 29 May 2018 10:52am

    If econsultation is so great just give the money to practices and because e consultation is so great they will buy it.

    What, you don't think they will?

    You think they might have several hundred more pressing, and effective things to do before econsultation comes anywhere near to being the answer, yes that right that's what everyone else thinks too!

  • This back-door reorganisation spells the end of NHS general practice

    David O'Hagan's comment 24 May 2018 5:50pm

    not accountable,
    don't care,
    not organised.
    ACO is a lie boldly stated.
    Accountability requires transparency and openness.

    Caring is expensive and we have and efficient system which has been driven to destruction.

    Taking funds out for increased 'administration' and 'share holders' reduces cost efficiency.

    This arrangement in rail has been shown to be a poor deal for the people, and for taxpayers. The disorganization of rail franchises clearly demonstrates the failure of this model. Strangely they involve the same companies too!

  • 'We are beginning to see the fruits of the GP Forward View'

    David O'Hagan's comment 01 May 2018 11:32am

    The investment may have flowed out of NHS Engand, but it has not gone to General Practice. It may have gone to the companies whose lobbying secured the funding. Those handy management consultants who set up the schemes outlined in the 5yfv.

    Still as long as their shareholders are happy we are all happy as our pensions are invested with them... what... they aren't?

  • £2.4bn GP support package ‘remains on track’ two years in, says NHS England

    David O'Hagan's comment 01 May 2018 10:17am

    it is an interesting list of achievements, but demonstrates what little respect they have for General Practice or for statistics.

    Whilst there may be 3900 FTE other practitioners how many less Nurses and Doctors are there?

    Whilst there are 2100 staff who have done the 1 hour 'care navigator' course to do what they were already doing is that course of benefit to anyone?

    And these same staff now look at letters? well who was it opening the post before?


    2100 practices 'benefitted' from resilience funding. £100 for a group of 4-5 practices to hold a meeting is very beneficial, but unlikely to turn the tide of the 'hostile environment' flowing daily from DoH to NHS E to CCG to practices.

  • Quarter of CCGs begin to implement ‘time for care’ GP practice changes

    David O'Hagan's comment 01 May 2018 9:06am

    mixed feedback = trying to think of something positive to say about this.

    They are all nice ideas, and there may be something that a practice can get from the whole package, if it has enough funding to 'play' with how the ideas work in practice.

    That is the problem, the funding is dependent on using these ideas, and often goes to the management consultant advising NHS England and not to the practice doing the work.

    Perhaps if federations want to do something to bring this money back to general practice they could set up as management consultants so that NHS England can give them the 'money for primary care' and it can be put in to practices!

  • GPs issue warning as London practices lose young patients to GP at Hand

    David O'Hagan's comment 26 Apr 2018 12:01pm

    The business modelling around this needs aspects from Babylon, but also demands a review of business planning from other affected practices, from affected commissioners of 1ry care, providers and commissioners of community services, and from the NHS as a whole.

    Whilst this organisation may be loss-funding this program for 'data gathering' or 'market busting', contingencies need to be built to prevent an evermore predatory approach to the UK treasury. At present it seems that the break point is the Health dept as even 'NHS' funding seems unable to use its structures to regulate funding to organisations set up with a predatory manner. The structures seem to be effective only for 'traditional' organisations, or 'gentlemanly conduct'.

  • GPs paid £50 to use motivational interviewing in medicine reviews

    David O'Hagan's comment 12 Apr 2018 10:33am

    the promise of resources in return for more work based on a gimic

    this is how the world is being run at present

  • It is time for the GMC to take ‘very serious’ action on racism

    David O'Hagan's comment 29 Mar 2018 10:43am

    does this mean that previous reviews were 'not very serious'?
    Why has the GMC though it not 'very serious' until now?

  • Growth of Babylon app threatens 'financial balance' of CCG

    David O'Hagan's comment 21 Mar 2018 3:19pm

    There are quite a few differences between the industries given above and healthcare. Many of those differences are relevant to the discussion. I agree we will see much more of this.

    Not least from those who do not understand how ill health affects people who never have their photograph taken, do not use barrels, and even manage without socks.

  • Practices will be able to claim 100% of premises upgrades costs

    David O'Hagan's comment 21 Mar 2018 9:03am

    'bid' for 'grants' so no money actually being delivered then

  • GPs urged to look out for ADHD symptoms in female patients

    David O'Hagan's comment 15 Mar 2018 10:46am

    Perhaps the school based educational psychology service would be ideally placed to manage this. If they did the screening tests on all children, instead of waiting until parents reported 'issues' then the pick up rate would increase dramatically.

    Of course you would need a lot more psychologists, and a lot more LD 2ry care, and a lot more drugs, and 'austerity' is far more important than lives. So it's not going to happen.

  • In full: GMC chair's apology to doctors over Bawa-Garba

    David O'Hagan's comment 13 Mar 2018 10:15am

    CJ: I didn't get where I am today by not being able to say one thing and do another convincingly

  • Anticoagulants may increase risk of stroke for CKD patients, study warns

    David O'Hagan's comment 15 Feb 2018 10:55am

    It would be expected to have more strokes in the at risk group, but studies in patients with a wide variety of conditions need to be done to balance the unthinking protocol driven increase in anticoagulation.

  • Villagers to buy surgery in bid to alleviate recruitment problems

    David O'Hagan's comment 06 Feb 2018 8:31am

    'i've not met anyone who wants it closed'
    She should perhaps talk to the CCG, NHS England, the DoH, and Mr Hunt.

  • Most GPs did not alter bronchiolitis hospital referrals following NICE guideline

    David O'Hagan's comment 01 Feb 2018 6:07pm

    oh for the diagnostic certainty of hindsight; it turned out to have been bronchiolitis, so that prescription for possible sepsis or pneumonia was obviously wrong. Why did you follow that wheezy baby pathway and not this ill baby pathway, both have tachypnoea as key symptoms, but in retrospect and guideline club there is never any overlap.

    When the evidence reflects the actual situation and not some imaginary ideal world than it might influence practice.

  • Telephone and e-consultations could lead to ‘hidden work’

    David O'Hagan's comment 30 Jan 2018 9:57am

    of course if investment in staff and other resources was 'following the patient'.. ie 'more work, more pay' then it would be less of a problem (although there is still the issue of nobody left to do the work due to loss of staff following years of persecution, lack of trust and abuse)