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

Revalidation 'fishing' exercises are completely over the top, says GPC

Exclusive GP leaders have raised concerns over reports of responsible officers routinely asking CCG leaders for their opinion prior to recommending whether GPs should be revalidated.

GP leaders in Essex claim they have been approached by CCG leaders who were worried that they were asked for their opinion on every GP before they were considered for revalidation.

The GPC said the practice was ‘completely over the top’, and was not in the agreed process for revalidation. But NHS England has defended the practice saying that responsible officers had to ‘assure themselves that they have information’ on doctors’ fitness to practise.

Essex LMC chair Dr Brian Balmer said he had been approached by a number of CCGs who were concerned about the process that was ‘confusing’ revalidation with performance management.

He said: ‘We thought that was inappropriate, They are not saying we have a suspected performance issues, but for every single doctor being revalidated they wanted the opinion of somebody in the CCG.’

‘We don’t think that’s the business of the CCG. We think the responsible officers are confusing revalidation with the investigation of performance, and we don’t think that’s appropriate.’

The responsible officer protocol guidance issued by the GMC does not list CCGs as a ‘source of information’ on which to base a decision to recommend revalidation, but does specify that the responsible officer must ensure they have enough information on a ‘doctor’s compliance with any locally agreed conditions on the doctor’s practice or any unaddressed concerns about the doctor’s practice’

Dr Dean Marshall, the GPC’s lead on revalidation, said that although ROs were meant to consider ‘other issues’ outside of those raised in appraisals, that did not include routinely approaching CCGs for their opinion on doctors.

He said: ‘Appraisal doesn’t equal revalidation completely, but that does not in any way mean RO’s should be routinely going round checking everyone and asking if there’s any issues that’s not what’s meant to happen.

‘If the RO had other evidence that they were aware of, fine, but the idea that they’d go fishing around for everyone is not what’s meant to happen and completely over the top. It’s certainly not within the agreed process for revalidation and it seems incredibly overzealous and, I think, of questionable value and questionable extra administrative problems for everyone with the ROs doing this routinely.

But a spokesperson from NHS England, defended the move, saying it was within the remit of the responsible officer.

He said: ‘It is the duty of the responsible officer to make recommendations to the GMC regarding the revalidation of doctors’ licence to practise in line with the national GMC protocol.

‘To ensure this process is robust, Responsible officers must assure themselves that they have information on doctors’ fitness to practise.’

A survey of responsible officers in London by The King’s Fund published last month found that just under half were positive about their experience of revalidation. The survey of 53 of London’s 133 responsible officers found that 10% were negative about their experience whilst the remaining 40% said that they reserved judgement on revalidation ahead of year two, which they believed would be ‘trickier’.

Readers' comments (11)

  • I don't really know anyone in the CCG, can I still be revalidated?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Revalidation + CQC = Complete waste of time

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I think the ROs need training because they are not confident enough to take the responsibility

    they act like matcho figures hiding behind their ignorance

    get in some qualified ROs

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • No chance of prejudice creeping in to any decisions then!!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It is crazy that medical profession signed up to revalidation at all

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • organising more relevant courses and needing 75% attendance might be more useful than revalidation protocol based on proving education.
    money can be saved by nhs and govt if local hospitals ask consultants to organise interactive study days for local GP and as it is all part of nhs no money should exchange hands as it can lead to better coordinated patient management with hospital colleagues sharing what they think should be done with patients and gp's able to ask them best way to practice about conditions concerning them

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • So this is just another means of making life difficult for those who are not in the in crowd and a means of protecting those who are. Those being revalidated will be vulnerable in the same way that trainees are if they upset someone or if they are not liked. It finishes up in the eportfolio as a permanent, defamatory written record.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Brian is absolutely right

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I understood that CCG's were run by GP's so they can re validate themselves?

    Isn't it time we allowed GP's to do what they trained to , care for patients?

    Who checks the credentials of those in the CQC?

    Perhaps reorganisation should start at the top, the government being the first to be voted out!

    Every time there is a change, it is the eGP's that take a bashing, yet without them, there is no NHS!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This comment has been edited by the moderator.

  • Who is revalidating the Managers and members of the Trust Board?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page

Have your say