This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

pulse june2020 80x101px
Read the latest issue online

GPs go forth

Named GP scheme to be based on existing funding

The Government has said that the health secretary’s ‘named clinician’ plans are based on current NHS funding but would not rule out the possibility of increasing investment for primary care.

A DH spokesperson told Pulse that the plan aims to ‘ensure that existing funding can be used most effectively’, but said that the ‘engagement’ will consider whether there is a need for more investment in primary care.

Health secretary Jeremy Hunt announced his plans at an event marking the 65th birthday of the NHS at London’s St Thomas’s Hospital on Friday. He said that the move was intended to drive forward better-integrated, coordinated out-of-hospital care, ensuring ‘patients and relatives have a single point of information and responsibility for their care’.

However, the DH would not elaborate on the plans, stating that it is currently consulting on the proposals and how they could be formulated and implemented in practice.

When asked whether these plans will attract new investment, the spokesperson said: ‘The plan aims to ensure that existing funding can be used most effectively, through the right care being delivered and providing value for money for the tax payer across health and social care.

‘However, the engagement will consider the potential financial implications of the proposals including the need for more investment in general practice.’

Doctors’ leaders have said there is a lack of detail in the proposals, with GPC chair Dr Laurence Buckman saying ‘every patient already has a named GP’.

The Government would not be drawn on the details of the plans, but the spokesperson said that the proposals will ‘mean that patients and carers will have a single point of contact, information and responsibility’.

Dr Charles Alessi, chair of the National Association of Primary Care, said the plans could mark the ‘rebirth’ of PMS.

He added: ‘This is locally determined services which fits the population. There are these mechanisms that exist at the moment that will actually allow these changes to happen using the flexibility we have with PMS.’

Readers' comments (13)

  • surprise surprise! He wants us to do it for free 24/7/365.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Surely GPs should get the £6000 back which our OOH services were valued at ;)

    Oh I forgot, I've retired and live in a sunny climate.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It is astounding to see the level of ignorance and the pig-headedness shown by our Mr. Hunted ! We need to introduce a simple test for all ministers to assess their fitness for purpose before they run riot, messing up the country's meager resources and finishing what is left of a decent NHS. Such a real shame !!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • and has the right honourable gentleman or his oh-so-clever associates even considered that many GPs are now salaried and will not, not should they, do any extra out of the goodness of their hearts. and what about APMS schemes where there is no partner to shoulder the burden?
    Mr Hunt, I do worry about the lack of detailed understanding currently displayed in your department.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I am seriously looking at resigning from my partnership if this truely comes in. It simply will not be worth it to face manslaughter or serious professional misconduct on matters I have almost no control on, to be paid 10-20% more than the salaried GPs who has none of these responsibilities.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Vinci Ho

    Steve (editor),
    As I said in another article , I have been 'hunting' for this living species through my old biology books:
    Found it!
    It is called Homosapien politikus and basically it thinks, speaks with its rear end and defaecates with its mouth😄😚

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Comment copied from a previous article on this...

    It's worth all those raging at this article to take a moment to remember the specific situation this is for - whilst in A+E Jeremy Hunt witnessed an elderly dementia patient who had fallen being assessed. The patient was unable to talk but all records were held by the GP and as this was out of hours, no-one could tell whether that was because of the fall or their existing condition.

    The devil is in the detail but decision support could well contact with a GP collective that can access the patient's primary care notes.

    That does not seem so unreasonable.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It makes no difference though, pt fallen and dementia - pt needs admission as will fall again and frankly social services is more important for information and you can't get hold of anyone after 5 pm from social services
    . If pts hospital notes very slim or no recent blood tests which would more easily available ,then there generally will be underlying reason that needs investigating, making political points to superficially keep pts happy without thinking is dangerous and will cause more harm. Most signifacant records are held within hospital depts, unless you want to know stuff about recent colds.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Of course what will happen is recycled QOF money from retired indicators will be presented to the press and public as new money to fund this.When GP's complain we will be accused of putting money before our patients and will grumble and get on and do the work.Job done for Mr H.Simple!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous 1.30pm

    In that scenario you simply admit them then speak the next working day with the practice. Knowing how many times they have fallen before, recent history of problems etc etc etc will not change immediate management one dot.

    If its an accident or emergency then that's what they are there for. If not then tell them to bugger off and bother somebody else who cares. Simples

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page

Have your say