"to provide them with the necessary treatment and care in a range of settings"
Could someone tell me what the treatment for C19 is in a patient that can make it to a hub in a car?
I'm not really sure what we're being asked to do. We've really got no role in the assessment of covid patients - either stay at home or 111/999 if you can't cope.
What can we add?
Guys, there has NEVER been a requirement for doctors to confirm death under English law. That's why nurses, hcas, funeral directors etc - any competent person - can do this. Google the BMA guidance. You should all know this!
The broader question, Doc, is what did your visit add? I'm not criticising you (who seems to have gone above and beyond) but rather the system.
Pregnant / SOB / Temp approaching 40 is something that we would have referred without visiting. You can tell from the obs that this was not someone that could be managed in the community without hospital assessment.
AccuRx is excellent for both text and video - however is anyone else cynical enough to detect a bit of opportunism from NHS-E here?
"People with symptoms should stay at home for 14 days"
I thought it was 7?
Has this changed?
It's a great outcome.
I can never understand why GPs like you want to pay to undertake more work, but I'm sure there's a reason, right?
We've had TWO patients that have been in affected areas (ie on the list) that have respiratory symptoms contact us and tell us that they were directed to us by 111.
FFS. They can't even follow their own protocol.
I think an Orthopaedic Consultant should check all children at 3-4 months.
So a GP AND a nurse, for 3 days.
That's under 27 patients total PER DAY.
Whereas most GPs would see more on their own (even without a nurse) during a normal day's work. Oh, and a couple of visits.
What a total waste of time and money.
Luckily PCNs (which are partly there to 'stabilise general practice') will make this a thing of the past.
It's long past time that GPs stop considering NHS England as a supportive friend.
Think of them as an abusive employer and it all makes sense.
Our practice was on black 5 opal alert but someone DNA'd and it went to emerald 3.
There isn't such a thing as "low risk prescribing".
The fact that the powers that be think there is should be worrying in itself.
Sorry, did a minister just claim that more work is less work?
Someone appears to have been taking a homeopathic approach to workload.
So I'm assuming that the PCN will have to hire someone to actually look at and process the data, right? But wait....there's no 70% reimbursement for this, is there? So either the CD can do it, constituent practices can do it, or PCNs can spend some of their already triple spent money on more administrative support.
Whenever's there's a crisis you can always trust NHS England to turn it into a catastrophe.
There is no question that you are engaging, but the fact that these specifications were released to begin with means that NHS England either completely misunderstands general practice or doesn't respect GPs at all. How on earth did you think things like 2 weekly care home visits could be bolted on to an overstretched service.
I'm sorry but only a moron would think that this would stabilise general practice. It's shameful that it was ever published.
They've already been successful?
A market is in operation.
If the salary went up to £200 per hour, there would be lots of takers.
It's very simple: the board is not willing to pay the market rate for GP cover.
It is only fair that this stupid service also be inflicted onto secondary care.