Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

CQC chief has no confidence 'at all' in revalidation process

The CQC’s chief inspector of primary care has ‘no confidence at all’ in the ability of the revalidation process after finding cases where there was ‘very little evidence’ that revalidated GPs were staying up to date, he said today.

Speaking at NICE’s annual conference this morning, Professor Steve Field said CQC’s inspection process should be supported by NHS England area teams through revalidation - but added he did not think it was currently up to the job.

Professor Field said: ‘We mustn’t forget that [checking the quality of] general medical practices is the role of NHS England… as well - the revalidation of GPs goes through the local area team, so they should be picking things up on appraisals.

‘So it’s not just about us going in and responding - they are part of this set up as well, we work very closely with them and really we shouldn’t be having any surprises because they should be there, monitoring the contract and working with people.’

However, asked by chair Dr Philip Hammond, former GP and broadcaster on NHS issues, whether he was confident that the GMC’s appraisal and revalidation process does pick up problems, Professor Field replied: ‘No. Not at all.’

Speaking to Pulse about why he lacked confidence in the process, Professor Field said he was concerned appraisals had not picked up cases where GPs were found wanting when it came to their CQC inspections - and warned he does not think NHS England has enough resources to do the job properly.

Professor Field said: ‘It’s not just the revalidation part but the appraisal. And what we’re picking up on our visits is the old ethos of regularly completing audit cycles doesn’t seem to be as common as it was a number of years ago.

‘My answer “no” is really that we’ve seen some practices where there’s been very little evidence of the GPs keeping up to date even though they had successfully been through a number of appraisals.

‘I can’t say [they have not completed clinical audits] - we haven’t had access to the appraisal documentation and nor should we because it’s confidential with the area team. But in future we would want to work with the area team and we would really like GPs to demonstrate to us when we go into their surgeries how they are learning and changing their practice based on clinical audits.’

He added: ‘I was working on revalidation as chair of College and I think the concept is really good. But we need to get a common standard across the country. And I know [NHS England deputy medical director Dr] Mike Bewick is working on this nationally but my observation is that within NHSE it doesn’t have the administrative support - particularly at area team level - so I worry about the resources being put into it and the possibility of variation.’

The revalidation process, which is carried out by the GMC, with NHS England providing the responsible officers who sign the revalidation of a doctor, was criticised by a group of influential MPs earlier this year, which found responsible officers were unable to form the necessary professional relationship with the practitioners they are assessing.

This followed an official report produced by the NHS Revalidation Support Team (RST), which found that doctors spent up to 15 hours a year on revalidation - six hours more than had been expected - which itself was short of the 40 hours estimated by one GPC negotiator last year.

During a discussion on how whistleblowers can be protected, Professor Field said the inspection team were increasingly receiving reports from nurses, practice managers and doctors about the standards of care in GP surgeries and that protecting their identity ‘is difficult sometimes’.

Professor Field said: ‘We’re getting an increasing number of [reports from] nurses, practice managers and even doctors about worries about the care in those surgeries.

‘These aren’t necessarily small surgeries - they can be big teaching surgeries, where the leadership - the well-ledness has gone, surgeries are dirty or they are not following the best NICE guidance or things like that.

‘And of course if you’re a nurse in a single handed surgery and you raise concerns about care you are likely to lose your job. So when we contact surgeries we do try to retain that persons anonymity where we can but it is very difficult for us sometimes.’

Niall Dickson, chief executive of the GMC, said: ‘Revalidation is at a very early stage. It is a success story so far. Throughout the NHS there are stronger systems of appraisal and clinical governance than ever before, and revalidation has been a significant catalyst of that change. We have never said that revalidation would detect every problem but the process that we and the healthcare system are building together will help to spot problems earlier and support doctors.

‘We also recognise that in England NHS local area teams who have responsibility for clinical governance in primary care and are the responsibility of NHS England are under pressure but a great deal of good work is being done and across the UK the systems for supporting and monitoring medical practice have improved and are improving – that will mean better safer care for patients.’

Readers' comments (16)

  • Did Field not play a lead role in the development of revalidation during his time as Chairman of the RCGP? I admire a guy who takes responsibility for his actions ...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Revalidation is one of the great hidden scandals of the NHS that those in power are trying to hush up. Sadly the newspapers aren't very interested as they are to busy smearing GPs as fat cats. If you want the truth, go and read the comments on the other forums. Everyone hates it but none of those at the top of the profession are prepared to admit how much damage it has done to GPs and patient care. Everybody knows that the only reason revalidation was brought in was as part of the plot to squeeze GPs until they gave up so the bones of the partnerships could be picked over by the private sector vultures. What should be happening is an enquiry to look at where the wasted resources have gone, how much consultation time has been wasted, who was benefiting and when can those responsible for this mess finally be held accountable.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This is about one man's quest for power rather then improving care. It makes mockery of the system when Prof Field decides HIS organization would have more power by demanding to inspect individual GPs, at the same time degrading an existing process which already does this.

    If he lack confidence in GMC/Appraisal/LATs why doesn't he "whistle brow" on them and change things for better rather then installing yet another layer of bureaucratic assessment? I let you guess why that might not be a good political move........

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Would dumping revalidation be any use as a protest ?
    It certainly wouldn't harm patients .

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • All these things are supportive of the fact that the NHS is in a real mess. Right hand does not know what the left is doing. National Debt is touching 1.4 trillion and free NHS is nothing but a luxury.
    All reforms are aimed at improving doctors as if there is a serious problem, fortunately there is none.
    Doctors are subjected to so many regulatory mechanisms like Appraisal process, GMC registration, CQC Inspection and Revalidation,
    Latest is that a CQC inspector will watch the GP-Patient consultation, where it is going to stop

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • NHS england should be taken to task for advocating Sulphonyureas as obligatory 2nd line treatment in Diabetes mellitus.Though allowed by NICE with a proviso to avoid them if we fear hypoglycaemis.EBM have shown it does cause a lot of expensive and life threatening hypos.The PCTs particularly barnet PCt have destroyed doctors who refused to prescribe Sulphonyureas as 2nd line treament in Diabetes

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I regard revalidation as simply a hoop to be jumped through. If I can't do the job after 43 years I will never be able to ! As a PROFESSIONAL I have always felt it incumbent of me to maintain professional standards, and keep up to date. Now we are being treated like school kids who must be tested all the time.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This is all rumour and inuendo - these practice's that Steve Field has failed in his role as CQC supremo - how does he know the GPs haven't done any clinical audits - did he ask them? did they show them to him?

    CQC hasn't got a very good track record themselves - mid staffs rings a distant bell - what score did CQC give them a while ago?

    Does any body have any confidence in CQC?

    Stones and glass houses ring another bell?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I hardly think doing one audit cycle once every five years is going to be the driving force for improvement in our surgeries.

    If he believes that the process of revalidation is what is needed to keep surgeries up to date then he is seriously deluded .

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Revalidation is a knee jerk reaction to Harold Shipman.
    A paper exercise of producing some audits without any evidence to show clinical behaviour has resulted in change. We discussed since early 1990 value of Continuous Medical Education (CME) ,to assure the
    patients and profession that polishing of knowledge improves the care. Revalidation and appraisal as Prof Field points out will not pick up under performers .
    Fortunately they are very few. Millions DOH spending on Revalidation is a waste of resources ,time .
    CQC should also stay away from this issue and make sure that practices have System, and process in delivery of service It is a system which will prevent failure .
    Those who knew of Harold Shipman will uniformly agree,revalidation could have not picked him.
    Shipman was a psychiatric patient with criminal mind who happened to be a doctor.
    Nation should not pay for criminal born once every century.
    I am sad for the NHS.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page

Have your say