"Joe McGilligan11 Feb 2016 3:29pm
Why is no-one asking the question who in their right minds rejects a 13.5% pay rise?? "
Because this is fundamentally not about pay. Its about patient safety. Its about not allowing a clueless government implement pointless changes that will harm patients. They could be offering a 400% pay rise, and this 7 day NHS would still be problematic if its going to be implemented on a shoestring, without proper planning, and without a good basis in reality.
It always makes me sigh when fellow pharmacists turn up here with the us vs them attitude, and vice versa.
It should be clear to anyone with any common sense that cost cutting measures like these aren't going to end well in the long term. Frankly anything that impacts primary care is all of our concern, regardless of what profession we're in.
The less energy we expend in-fighting, the more we have left over to direct where it is needed.
Well, this is awkward. Because we have Pulse, here claiming one thing, and C+D over there claiming the opposite.
Is it maybe possible that certain individual pharmacies AND certain individual practices are up to no good, but such a minority of both doesn't represent the wider profession of either.
Is it also possible that everyone stops throwing anger and accusations at each other and instead starts throwing it higher up the food chain to where the actual blame lies.
It's in the government's best interests to have warring factions, as it distracts from what's really going on here. In the current climate, we need to be standing together, not being manipulated into this petty to-ing and fro-ing.
We're squabbling away, and it's exactly where they want us.
I'm completely confused by the PA role if I'm honest. Surely GP-lite supporting roles are better fulfilled by pre-existing, regulated HCP roles (nurses, pharmacists etc).
"They are very black and white and don't understand the grey areas in medicine."
Any evidence for this statement, or is it purely stereotyping?
I'd suggest that we have a very good understanding of the grey areas, as well as an understanding of how constrained we are by licensing, funding etc. A properly funded, well organised minor ailments scheme should and could be an amazing asset to any primary care scenario. Sadly, negotiations for a national minor ailments service have been quietly dropped.
This us vs them attitude is extremely unhelpful. Whilst I'd encourage skepticism at every opportunity, it's plain old, begrudging cynicism that I see here. For every "ooh that mean pharmacist sold one of my patients a cough bottle that didn't work" I could reel off a million bad GP stories, but that would get us absolutely nowhere.
So, emotions to one side, and let's bring in the evidence.
"at least 1000 calls" doesn't sound like a "very small number" to me.
Anon @ 2:05pm
"People who can't get appointments are just people who can't wake up at the appropriate time, and stay on hold until they get through."
Umm. At the time I had problems getting appointments, I was getting up at 4:30am and returning home at 12:30pm...
My main problem with my surgery at the time was non-urgent, but important, appointments. Same day appointments are great if you can rush off to one at the drop of a hat, but not if you need to find a locum to cover your absence.
The problem with this is that you're not always acutely ill when you need an appointment. Cervical screens, contraception, reviews etc.
As a pharmacist, I used to work 12-16 hour shifts (Mon-Sat) in a 100 hour pharmacy. If I needed an appointment, I needed to arrange locum cover with plenty of advance warning. My surgery at the time (open Mon-Fri 9-5, closed Wed afternoons) refused to allow arranging appointments in advance. This made it virtually impossible for me to actually manage to see my GP, ever.
Luckily I have a job with better hours now, and a much more flexible practice. Unfortunately not everyone has the ability to leave work for an appointment whenever it suits them, with very little notice.
I can't see what the difference is between this leaflet and NHSE- endorsed schemes encouraging people to see their pharmacist, MIU etc...
Except for that this leaflet explains the reasons why the problems occur, and implies that it may partly be NHSE's fault.
Cynical of them, then, to demand that it is not used. Its okay when its their idea, but if its someone else's initiative, and it paints them in a honest light...
Lorna- i wish you were my GP. What a wonderful attitude :)
I completely agree that "patient satisfaction" may be completely unreliable when it comes to rating a health care professional's efficacy. What of the patients who trot in wanting antibiotics for a viral infection, and leave feeling annoyed for not getting them?
Often a good health care professional will make decisions that are directly at odds with the patient's intentions (probably helped along by Dr Google and the Daily Mail). Patients can have a quite skewed idea of risk, and merrily demand things that would be unsafe for them, then proceed to be annoyed.
I trust you have evidence to back up your claim that there have "been far far too many reports of abuse." as compared to GPs.
All pharmacies will have in place a chaperone policy.
I agree with anonymous's previous comment: it seems rather ironic for a practising homeopath to wonder how something could possibly be used in advance of robust evidence.
There is, at least, prior plausibility that paracetamol may work as an analgesic, given it does actually at least contain paracetamol. You know, of the sort that can work on the real life prostaglandins that science has proved exist. Seems a lot more robust to me than using sugar and water and hoping that all of physics and science are wrong just to prove homeopathy right.
oh, the tales of woe I could tell of the vast communication gulf between the GP and pharmacist.
I've never known a pharmacy to close for training days....
Hmm. The advice for avoiding aqueous cream is partially based on a study including six people with healthy skin. tenuous at best.
Speaking as a pharmacist who used to regularly work 16 hour shifts with no break (and not even a desk to sit at to hastily eat a sandwich), I can sympathize with GPs who are working long hours. I always greatly envied the ability of my surgery to have "training days" etc- If I ever needed a Drs appointment, or to leave the pharmacy for a meeting, or was even sick, I had to make sure that I knew in plenty of time to be able to arrange a locum.
Beautifully written. Sadly the same could well be said for the pharmacy profession too, as well most staffing groups in the NHS, I suspect.