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

Royal college backs Hunt’s ‘name and shame’ proposals

The Royal College of Pathologists has backed health secretary Jeremy Hunt’s proposals to ‘name and shame’ GPs who continually fail to spot signs of cancer.

The RCPath president Dr Archie Prentice said the college embraces Mr Hunt’s plans to ‘publicise persistently poor detection of new cancers’ by GPs, in a letter in the Telegraph today.

Over the weekend, Mr Hunt vowed to root out GPs who put patients’ lives at risk by failing to send them to hospital for vital tests soon enough - and that doctors found to be dismissing early cancer symptoms as something less serious could face being identified with a ‘red flag’ on an NHS website.

Dr Prentice told the Telegraph: ‘The Royal College of Pathologists welcomes proposals by Jeremy Hunt, the health secretary, to publicise persistently poor detection of new cancers by GPs. The timely diagnosis of cancer depends on clinical suspicion backed up by efficient use of the right test.’

‘The marked discrepancies in the use of blood tests by GPs for some cancers are described starkly in the recently published NHS Diagnostic Atlas of Variation. There is a five-fold variation in the use of the PSA test for prostate cancer and a nine-fold variation in the use of CA125 for ovarian cancer. These tests are available across the NHS. There is no single satisfactory explanation for such variable performance, but it is not because of differences in the demographics of GPs’ patients.’

He added that there needed to be the development of a list of tests that had been validated for use within the NHS.

Dr Prentice said: ‘Uniform and rapid communication of results of all tests from pathology labs to all users, especially GPs, requires the development of a national laboratory medicine catalogue, a list of pathology tests that have been validated for use within the NHS. The NHS funding of this is at risk. The college has urged the secretary of state to protect this project and its funding.’

The RCGP criticised the health secretary’s plans.

Dr Richard Roope, RCGP and Cancer Research UK clinical lead for cancer, said: ‘We know that we can always improve but using crude ranking systems to measure our performance and ability to care for our patients, may not tell the whole story.’

 

 

Readers' comments (30)

  • Bob Hodges

    Dr Prentice doesn't seem to know that PSA and CA125 'blood tests' are not recommended for use as routine screening for cancers in the real world of clinical practice.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • DO we actually care what Pathologists think -they're not clinicians. USeful in what they do but thats it.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I thought this was a spoof with " DR Pretence" but seems to be a real doctor with real opinion!

    I know there is a pan european studies on PSA as a screening tool but right now, it is NOT recommended as a screening tool, nor is Ca125.

    Yet again, our so called leaders are too slow to react to counter such easily foiled attempt at degrading us.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Glass houses......stones.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I'm all for anything that hastens the demise of the NHS.That's the only way the public will learn

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Is this chap a conservative and/or after a place in the lords?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Let's just refer everything and let the system collapse

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • appalling cheek..this pathologist should be taken to task...i am absolutely sick of specialists interfering in matters of which they have little knowledge or experience.every time this sort of trash gets into the public domain it undermines the gp/patient relationship and damages patient care..gmc guidance is not at all keen on arrogant comments made by one dr against another...for a pathologist to arrogantly 'ontificate about clinical matters makes me feel sick

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Et tu Brute!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I love how a doctor who hasn't seen a living patient in his post graduate life can give such an opinion

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page50 results per page

Have your say