Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Choose & Book targets miss point

The Choose and Book debate is going round and round in circles. It is fine for Dr Miller to be quoted as saying that the target was to reach 90% of referrals through Choose and Book ‘as soon as possible' (‘Choose and Book take-up stalling', News, 23 August) but Dr Miller is not taking into account the stumbling blocks.

I don't use Choose and Book for re-referrals where the patient has recently been seen by a department that holds the file – around 10% of referrals. I can't use Choose and Book for routine antenatal or diabetic eye clinic referrals.

Quite a few of the elderly in particular – 15% – just can't handle Choose and Book unless the hospital appointment is directly bookable.

There has been a marked dearth of information about directly bookable appointments.

These must surely reduce the 17% of people who don't get around to booking an appointment under Choose and Book.

In my area directly bookable appointments account for less than 20% of appointments, solely because they are not fully available.

Instead of simplistically talking of hitting the 90% target, why doesn't Dr Miller tell us more about this?

From Dr William Lettington,Lewisham, south London

Rate this article 

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Have your say