This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

A faulty production line

GPC to propose radical plan to merge all unscheduled NHS care in bid to solve out-of-hours crisis

Exclusive The GPC is poised to publish an alternative plan to improve out-of-hours care, proposing all unscheduled care is merged together and rebutting the health secretary’s call for contractual changes to force the profession to take back 24/7 responsibility for their patients.

In an exclusive interview with Pulse, the new GPC chair Dr Chaand Nagpaul said they would propose that out-of-hours care, walk-in centres, minor injury clinics are merged and work together with the NHS 111 service.

Dr Nagpaul said that Jeremy Hunt’s call for contractual changes was a ‘red herring’ and ‘missed the point’ of how to solve the real problems with out-of-hours care.

He also said that CCGs had not been given real power over the budgets for unscheduled care and that many GP commissioners were ‘hamstrung’ from sorting out their out-of-hours care issues locally.

The comments are the first sign of how the GPC is going to fight back against a concerted campaign from the health secretary to force GPs to take back 24/7 responsibility for their patients.

Mr Hunt has suggested said he wants GPs to ‘sign off’ care for their patients out of hours and that he wants ‘the buck to stop’ with GPs by making them the accountable clinician for all the care their patients receive outside hospital.

But Dr Nagpaul branded the idea was a ‘populist tick-box’ and said that the GPC would be pressing for a different vision for out-of-hours care with all services providing unscheduled care locally working together.

He said: ‘The GPC has recently produced a document we will be publishing, proposing our version, our vision of how out of hours services can work in the NHS. We believe this does offer a sensible way forward that would meet the needs for patients.

‘I think the important thing for out-of-hours is to give GPs the ability to influence the organisation and delivery of out-of-hours services. We think the idea of talking about GPs being personally responsible contractually is a red herring and isn’t actually addressing the problem.’

He added that additional resources and a different model for out-of-hours care was needed: ‘We do not see the sense of having all of these separate players providing unscheduled care out of hours. To have 111 operating as a separate entity, having Darzi clinics seeing patients separately, having A&E minor injury clinics, and GP out of hours all separately.

‘We see an enormous benefit in bringing all the multiple unscheduled care providers together, but also bringing social care into the picture, to create a coordinated whole. We believe this will be able to offer patients the care they need out of hours.’

The announcement is the first big policy statement by Dr Nagpaul after being elected chair yesterday.

Hitting out at the Government, Dr Nagpaul said CCGs have not been given real power over the unscheduled care budgets and that the idea of having a ‘named clinician’ was not something that the GPC supported.

He said: ‘What we don’t want is a system which is either just a token gesture, neither do we want a system that is not deliverable. I think we need to learn more about what the Government wants with this and move away from a populist tick-box that you’ll have a named clinician.

‘We shouldn’t be talking about a named clinician, it is putting an end product before thinking what the needs are. So what I want it a dialogue with the Government about patient needs, patients of all categories.’


Readers' comments (31)

  • I would support this stance. Having 111 and OOH providers etc run by different organisations just doesn't work. Much easier to pass the buck and throw things over the fence causing duplication of effort and poor patient expeirnce. Bring them all together. Gets my vote. I can see a few practical obstacles in the way but we can overcome those I'm sure. Let's get behind this and drive this as clinical commissioners and make it happen.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Why are the providers trying to define what the patients need? Who is asking the patients what they need. The GPs do not have that knowledge so why are they trying to define the solution.
    As always-- ask the customer . Wouldnt that be unique for the GPs/ NHS.
    After all GPs are private contractors who have a vested interest in protecting their revenues. Their views are obviously tainted by self interest.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Dear Anonymous. I completely agree that patients need/must have input into this, and indeed in our locality we have already asked their views at a public meeting and our CCG plans to do this over the whole patch. I have to say I do think that GPs have a very good insight into what works best for our patients. We have been in this game for quite some time and really do have our patients' best interests at heart and I am a little diappointed by your negativity, and actuallly I am not saying the GPs should necessarily provide the contracts, but as commissioners they couldcommission from one provider whoever it is to provide this joined up service.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Of course patients should be consulted. But in reality patient demands need to be responsibly balanced with what's possible, what's affordable and most importantly with clinical priorities which put the mosy needy first. Currently too often those that misuse the system and shout the loudest are pulling valuable resources away from people who really need them.
    Misuse of urgent care is one of the biggest reasons it's under's time for a bit of responsibility and rationality to return to the way the NHS is used. My goodness if it wasn't for confidentially we'd all have some stories to tell....

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Merging various out-of-hours work would muddy the principal issue; patients are now effectively excluded from receiving own GP cover out-of-hours and commonly comment about the trust-undermining impact of this change.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • its not a bad idea actually. Its nice to see someone making a productive suggestion about how we might "counter" the governments ridiculous propoganda and headline grabbing rubbish by proposing a sensible idea of our own. This is a good idea in principle but i would be concerned that it would be very diffcult to implement practically. Having said that, one organisation running the OOH care would mean at least a joined up approach to services (you would hope). This would seem to be a better alternative to the suggestions of the people who seem to think we all should be on call 24/7, 365 days a year. Presumably, this proposal would allow for a continuation of OOh being provided by GPs who actually want to do it rather than it being an imposition made from above.
    Anonoymous GP registrar

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • the comment about " ask the patients "- a lot of us have some expierence as patients with access to OOH care - either for us or for our loved ones.So to state that we can not have any idea about what patients want is nonsense, most likely written by somebody who is fortunate enough to never have been at the " mercy " OOH care

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It is easy to ask patients what they want, harder to ask patients what they are willing to pay for. We have a really good participation group with a couple of members who put the brakes on expensive ideas by asking them what services would you like to stop to fund your ideas.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The problem here is not who is running any of it but the ridiculous requests from a large percentage of patients, reading through the hundreds of out of hours reports on a monday has turned into a joke, to quote but a few "i put antibacterial hand gel on my hands visiting a relative and then sucked my finger...have i poisoned myself" or "i ordered my script from my GP on wednesday but i forgot to pick it up so can i get a repeat from you" or " ive had sickness for the last 30minutes what should i do" or "ive just been to my doctors because i wanted antibiotics for my sore throat but they wont give them to me so i need you to" do i need to go on! The sooner people realise that they are causing the out of hours crisis the better. There was a time when common sense prevailed but this "need now ,seen now, instant access" that has been brain washed into previously sensible people has caused what is and will be unsustainable until people take responsibilty for themselves. i used to work for OOH years ago and i can tell you from experience people phoned with real medical need not the pile of clap trap we see nowadays!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • If you ask a 3 year old what he wanted, and bought him all he wanted every day, guess how long your money will last? Do you tell your child he cannot have everything he wants and you'll only buy him things which you feel is right for him?

    Unfortunately many patients has the same level of self restraint and understanding of the budgets as a 3 years old. People don't seem to under stand referrals costs money, drugs costs money, MRI scans costs money, operation costs money and even an appointment with me costs money. And not all of it necessarily good or needed for that person.

    But there again, everyone seems to think their unmet needs are far greater than the unmet needs of the society as a whole.

    P.s. I choose 3 years olds as that that age awareness of other's needs hasn't developed yet. I mean no discrimination against any 3 year olds :)

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

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

Have your say