This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

CAMHS won't see you now

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.

Headline

This election needs proper initiatives around GP workload

Comment

Jaimie, we GPs do not define safe workloads. It is pointless to keep saying 'excessive' without any definition of ' normal' is. We accept a Patient number based contract with no definition of appointments/ consultations per patient. So, if consultation per patient goes up threefold in 20 years and continues to rise year on year, but we continue to stick to the same patient number mantra rather than define workloads by appointment number, which we can quantify as safe then we can only blame ourselves. BMA ARMs through the years have decided against appointment based Contracts or even defining safe consultation/ day/week. I remember Clare Gerada [ I think ] saying she would not like to the GP's 50th patient that day, but did not stay to define what number she would like to be. I did maths once and it is still my hobby. I believe the Universe is mathematical. How many GPs we need [ eg 6000] has to be based on some mathematical concept of appointment numbers/ WTE GPs/ workload capacity to define a few parameters. The ball is not with the Govt. It lies with us.

Posted date

11 Nov 2019

Posted time

11:07am

required
required
required