Quick advice to local GP's to keep these 6 practices out of your Primary Care Networks.
They'll drag you down.
Can someone explain how this actually works re payments etc?
The business owners holding the actual risk need to make the decisions.
If you want input to decision making, become a partner.
Did we ever find out how the true identity was revealed?
'...empower GPs to challenge decision making by hospital colleagues.'
Good GP's already do this. An increasing amount of secondary care prescribing is very poor from people with no generalism experience and I regularly ignore the 'advice' - telling my patients why.
This is also partially why I dislike patients being copied in to letters by consultants. It takes far more time to undo the poorer recommendations. Future shared electronic prescribing will also be bad for this.
Bob is right. Section 5.16 is the key part. The GPC need to be all over this like a rash as it’s clearly stated. I saved a copy as I suspect this will disappear soon.
This case says more about the specialty of Psychiatriy than the GMC.
Completely right. Adding it to GMS just means those who currently lose out via Carr-Hill lose out some more.
GPC were poor here - they should address this.
I was very bored and looked at the recent CQC / Babylon emails around their CQC report.
The very interesting stuff is around number of prescriptions issued and also appointment counts. The PR is brilliant but the raw numbers simply do not suggest a massive 'disruption' in the next 5 years.
I love technology more than anyone I know and think that GP's need to up their online game. I also like new collaborations.
But no way would I let someone get between the relationship between me and my patients and then unbundle me by offering a 'free' service to my easy patients (along with some probable upselling). What the hell are these practices thinking?
Looking at the accounts they look like a company that has had circa £4 million of venture capital which is slowly going down and are trying to pivot towards a profitable business model. I guessing they don't succeed.
The CCG HQ seems a sensible solution tbh. I’m going to do this.
I assume that they won a APMS bid.
NHS England policy is that no new GMS contracts are being created.
Something feels wrong here.
This is really about recruiting bodies for the core phone service and not GPatHand.
The waits can be surprisingly long.
More income for practices. This is good.
Mr Hancock is gold dust for Pulse - you must be loving him already!
It's not hard, just shut up for your first 4 weeks and do the rounds. What a spectacularly poor start from him.
Reading page 5 of the paper GP at Hands business model may have a big problem.
My main concerns are with NHS Chairman Malcolm Grant who chaired the event.
He has been struggling for a while and this adds more fuel to arguments around his questionable judgment.
Why are you speaking with paramedics?
Bill is getting admitted. End of.
That proportion of patients moving GP without changing address would normally trigger a practice performance review in most regions.
TBH I don't mind GP at Hand but I have a few concerns re the NHS/CCG here in that they are seemingly allowed to openly flout the GMS rules in several areas.
All I want is a level playing field.