A little depressing to see someone with such negative views acting as a quality improvement fellow. If she hasn't read freakonomics yet I recommend she does. And speak to someone who has worked where a fee is paid for access.
How do you identify how much it is being used? I suspect ours is mini
mal but would like to know.
This is exactly what we have done in south warwickshire using primegp.co.uk We have seen a 20% reduction in use of GP appointments, a reduction in use of A&European and a slowing of hospital admissions. At the same time we see increases in staff morale, logical community support and soaring patient satisfaction.
Couldn't disagree more with comments so far. We have arts clubs, luncheon clubs, tea dances, mosaic classes. Result: 20% reduction in GP attendance. This isn't about saving money. It's about doing the obvious reduces workload. https://goo.gl/iejS30
To Simon Gilbert- yes we did compare cohorts. Pts in same practice not involved continued to increase their use of GPs and those who took up the offer of social intervention dramatically used it less with almost immediate effect.
In South Warwickshire we found it reduced GP consultations by 20% and also reduced unplanned admissions and A&E attendances. Look at the 75+ model by primegp.co.uk . Now recommissioned and being copied.
We found Prime75+ project reduced consultations. Lifted morale. Very popular across the practices. http://goo.gl/25AH0m
Why not evaluate before rolling out? Are these people scientists or simply politicians?
If you haven't read Freakonomics, read it now to see what happens if you charge for missed appointments. It will produce an increase in DNA with a sense of entitlement to do so.
I agree with the previous contributors. One reason I read pulse on line is because you can see at a glance what is new and what catches your eye. This one is too much like GP magazine which I don't read on line because it is very poor layout.
If it stays like this, I will stop reading it.
Interesting idea to go to USA which commonwealth fund identified at possibly the most expensive and least effective health services, whilst the uk came top in efficiency and cost.
This comment has been deleted
GPs to ensure dying patients have individual care plans as part of Liverpool Care Pathway replacement
Bit like the liverpool care plan. Don't tell the daily mail.
Why is everyone posting as anonymous? Is their opinion to embarrassing to put a name to?
I have worked in systems where the patient pays for a consultation. And no it was not not somewhere like Australia or Europe, but a mission hospital in St Lucia where people would pay a week's wages to see a dr. It didn't reduce work load, but it did did change the dynamics of the consultation. It led to increased investigations, longer consultations, more demand as a right by patients, and people would continue bringing their children even if you had seen them only a day or so earlier for the same self limiting conditions that you had tried to educate them to self treat.
So no, not a good idea, not a safe idea, and not a cost effective idea.
It would be interesting to know what the problems were and whether the minister returned at a different time to continue the discussion. When did he book the appointment? How long did he have to wait? One sided criticism is not fair and I would like to see the minister giving the GP an opportunity to defend himself. Could he be asked?
The one thing all these seem to have in common is there is loss of continuity of care and repackaging many services that are already available that many of us use already. Telephone, on line apps, single point of contact, Internet advice. I was hoping for innovation, not rehash of failing systems like nhs111 under a new name. Has the government not looked at the figures that show continuity of care is the major factor in both satisfaction and appropriate use of services?