GP. National Chairman of Family Doctor Association.
For many years, locum GPs accepted that their freedom to pick and choose work meant that they were not always fully occupied - and their reaonable fees gave them an income less than the partners, who invest heavily of their own money into a practice - and accept the risk involved of joint and several liabiity for practice debts, should they occur. There was no real market for salaried doctors before the 2004 contract, as a GP Assistant (as they ere then) could only be engaged uner the Red Book in particular circumstances, did not attract the Basic Practice Allowance and was seldom used.
After 2004, salaried models became very much more common. With the increasing stresses and strains of partnership, many made a perfectly reasonable decision to work only as a locum and supply and demand meant that high fees could be charged - one of the commentators above made £130,000 last year - no doubt hard earned, but higher than many partners' incomes.
The pendulum is swinging again and more doctors are choosing substantive roles - in Wessex recruitment for partners and salaried doctors is buoyant. I think this will pan out as far fewer locums, genuinely providing the cover for holidays and sickness as it always used to be, and more substantive doctors working in practices in various roles to the benefit of continuity of care and job satisfaction.
There will be a transition painful to many but the end reault should, I think, be better.
I didn't think being on a ventilator exempted you from appraisal. Which is why I shall deregister when I retire at the end of May...
I'd like to thank all who have supported us over the years - and all who we have supported with education, pastoral care and the friendship of an unique organisation. Not just in small practices but with factsheet learning on current problems such as QOF changes, of use to all in general practice.
We cut our costs to the bone yet still could not remain viable. A very sad day for general practice.
Dr Hodges, you are a cynic Sir.
Shame that you're also right.
and not once in the PCN Draft DES document is Continuity of Care even mentioned.
It is sad that I have moved on, after 35 years as a principal, to being salaried in the practice I founded in 1995. I would no longer relish the challenge of running the practice, coping financially with the much higher overheads which have come (pension contributions) and which are coming (national living wage) and the ever increasing expectation of outputs from an ever diminishing working pool of GPs.
PCNs had the opportunity to help in all sorts of ways. This PCN DES is not it. It is poisonous. So many parts of it demands "GP Leads". In my book, leads have an owner on one end and a lapdog on the other.
GPC - we don't need lapdogs, we need Rottweilers. Until some teeth are shown to the administrariat, nothing will change. Nikki Kanani, as National Medical Director for Primary Care (and a real GP) understands but I think that she is being bounced into accepting this gold-plated specification when practices just lack the workforce to manage it, in conjunction with their core job of looking after the sick.
Yes. Paranoia is not sectionable here. The Family Doctor Association is happy to use its national influence to help preserve smaller practices for the benefit of its members. All practices in good standing with the FDA will get all our support to the best outcome - we are happy to engage with the bureaucrats on their behalf and provide vital support.
Some years ago, a PCT "mediator" visited me re a rather vexatious complaint. When he visited the patient, one entire wall of their living room was covered in bookshelves bearing bound copies of notes he had made of every single encounter with anyone from "authority", be it local government, doctor etc. Truly bonkers.
Congratulations to Martin. Academic? Yes. Front line GP? Yes. A healthy mixture and the Family Doctor Association looks forward to continuing friendly relations with the College.
What a bizarre and evidence-free contention. Why would Brexit, with or without a "deal", slow down medicine supply? There should be no "at-the-port" obstruction on our side. So why is extra capacity needed? This is soundbite heaven from a remainer and Project Fear.
We have enough problems with supplies of common medications as it is - pages of commonly prescribed drugs that our patients just cannot get. Sort that out, Mr Stevens.
Did you understand all that??? Me neither! That's why we need to employ the services of Paul Gordon or Sean O'Connell (usual disclaimers)
CQC inspection this morning. I will leave Kailash's headline on my right hand computer screen when they come in to see me and, as always, ask for evidence of their effectiveness, usefulness etc. They managed to register "Better Health Partnership" in Swindon - the group of 5 IMH practices (including what was mine) as an entity a month before they became a legal entity. Quite an achievement.
so, 7-23% of antibiotic prescriptions are not needed. The art, of course, is working out which 7-23% you are in... and to fail to prescribe when you should risks the patient, increases the risk of scarlet fever etc etc. We are already doing better than any other sector of the health economy at prescribing well. Stop blaming GPs and try to attack the hospital sector, where they (presumably) see their inpatients every day...???
Careful here - this was announced a few days ago. The cover is valid if you retire AT YOUR NORMAL PENSION AGE. For members of the 2015 scheme, that could mean you have to work to 68 to be safe or pay 7 years' run-off cover premium. How many of us will stay in this job until the age of 68???
DrDr quite correct. Time for others to fit in with us rather than dictating what we should do. This is intended to be a GP led initiative, whatever you may think of "working at scale"! Look out for Family Doctor Association factsheet series coming to your practice manager's inbox shortly to give you the rules, untainted!
1. Show me the regulation on which you are relying to say that I must produce a Brexit plan. The government has failed to do so in 2.5 years. I plan to take the same time to produce one.
2. Convince me that the world will fall apart with a No Deal - or WTO-rules - Brexit
3. Remember the Millenium, when all the great and good went and hid in bunkers expecting civil disturbance (GOK why) and all computers were expected to fail? I worked the night, had little to do and enjoyed the fireworks.
4. Don't waste time on this when we should be concentrating on forming Primary care Networks to bring more money into our practices and improve patient care.
What a fudge! Do I need a letter of comfort? I've not been accused of a criminal offence! We either prescribe to all or refuse to all - leaving us to decide if someone can't afford it is really unacceptable. We will always get the "entitled Grauniad reader" patient who insists on a script and has the time to make life miserable as the complaint process (usually direct to NHSE thus involving the PAC) grinds through. Let's just get the clarity of NHS prescribable or not.
Just for once this is not something to get all worried about but a mechanism for getting money into groups of practices. The redevelopment of the Primary Care Team as a Multidisciplinary Team at PCN level is very welcome and will reduce silo working where we are working against district nurses etc instead of with them.
So delighted to see Dr Hendow win. Shows how good a small practice can be with a devoted, vocational GP at the centre of the practice. As one of the judging panel, I was highly impressed with the quality of entries - most of whom would be deserving winners any other year,
I would do a "routine" referral to the podiatry clinic for patient 3. Worded to make it sound urgent to the lay reader and give the appropriate messaging to the provider.