“As a regulator, we will use all our influence and powers to support doctors and medical students.”
Ha Ha Ha. I love a bit of irony.
There is one thing being "expected to do this". I won't be doing anything unless there is a formal contract and payment attached.
Faceless clinicians or admin cancel or delay the referrals, but who is left carrying the medicolegal risk. The only identifiable clinician is the GP, until they are seen in clinic
“Leading an integrated approach to care across Swindon is central to our long-term strategy and providing GP services, alongside our hospital and community services,“
Blah blah blah.Management speak
I wonder if medico legal consequences could arise for the CQC inspectors if any patient comes to har from this action.
Hold on a minute. We are assuming the CQC ratings are valid. In reality they are an incoherent amateur mess of a quango who ratings bear no correlation with quality. It is a bit random.
They are best ignored as much as possible
If somebody tells you they are a critical friend....run for the hills. I would consider myself a critical foe of the CQC.
I wonder if the BMA could take the CQC to court for breaching the human rights act in their dealing with doctors ?
Just ludicrous comments.
This is ridiculous nonsense.. At best your are hopelessly naive.
The CQC should be disbanded. It is just a self serving quango.
I hardly ever used to call 999. You have to now because otherwise the patient will be waiting for 6 hours in your surgery.
Delusional. The RCGP has no relevance to actual General Practice
The is not about trying to care for children. It is about being duplicitous, and trying to offshift work and blame to GP’s.
Designing a form with no input from GP’s and then blaming GP’s if the form isn’t filled in correctly is frankly shocking.
Of course this is nonsense.
However the question that needs asking is will the pharmacist keep medical records and have indemnity personally...or will all the risk be siphoned up to the supervising GP.
It is all self justifying nonsense of course. There is no reproducible validity to a CQC inspection.
It is nothing to do with patient care. It is a quango trying to justify their existence. However politically they were set up to control primary care and is part of the privatisation agenda. It is much easier for a large private company to pass CQC than a small GP practice.
"Health secretary Matt Hancock has also said he will consider increasing the GP workforce by an extra 5,000 in the upcoming NHS workforce plan."
Didn't someone else promise that if I remember.
So are they going to keep notes and be liable medicolegally for their decisions. It must be high risk stuff.
This will not help in any way and increase workload. More GP's are needed.
It is no within our skillset to diagnose or treat these incidentaloma. I refer everything in the spirit of reducing risk.
It is good for them to be regulated. Who regulates ANP's however.