- £40.9m: total projected cost.
- £125,000: -£200,000: estimated salary of officers
- 1,000: number of officers to be employed
- 37.5%: predicted reduction in GPs to be referred to the GMC
- 75%: increase in the number of cases resolved through remediation
- 2: maximum number of days training for the officers
- Source: Department of Health Impact Assessment
Newsletter sign up
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
One in 20 doctors face investigation
06 Oct 09
One in 20 doctors could face investigation by the Government’s new network of responsible officers in the first two years of the system, it has been revealed.
Department of Health predictions seen by Pulse show it is anticipating a 20% increase in the number of GPs referred to their employer by the new army of investigators.
It suggests this will lead to an additional 208 doctors being subject to remediation, with the percentage of overall cases resolved with some form of remediation increasing by 75%.
But the documents also reveal that the £200,000-a-year responsible officers – almost all likely to be trusts’ clinical directors - will get a maximum of just two days training to take on the job of deciding GPs’ careers.
The DH suggests the introduction of responsible officers, a key part of revalidation, will lead to a 37.5% reduction in the proportion of cases referred to the GMC, with 67 fewer cases sent to the Council.
But although the DH impact assessment estimates an overall drop of 15% in the number of cases being formally investigated, it suggests that earlier and improved detection of cases will see 20% more GPs being referred to their employer - an additional 378 cases per year.
Controversially, despite its claim that the officers will be fully equipped for the hugely onerous task of judging whether doctors are referred to the GMC, the assessment claims they may require as little as one day’s training for the role.
‘We anticipate that training will take no more than two days,’ the document says.
Medical defence bodies welcomed the push towards earlier detection, but raised serious doubts over the accuracy of the claims, and poured scorn on the training plans.
Dr Hugh Stewart, medicolegal adviser at the Medical Defence Union said: ‘It’s not clear why the simple introduction of a responsible officer would lead to a decrease in cases referred to the GMC, when the thresholds for referral remain the same.’
Dr Stephanie Bown, director of policy at the Medical Protection Society, criticised the meagre amount of training being planned.
‘These projections are dependent on having highly skilled competent responsible officers. It worries me that I do not see the commitment to training to be confident that this might work.’
Dr Una Coales, a GP trainer in Stockwell in South London, said two days was not enough time to train the officers sufficiently. ‘They have to be given longer. This is two days to potentially end someone’s career.’
A Department of Health spokesperson said: ‘The length of training for responsible officers will be considered in light of responses to the consultation and subsequent piloting.’
Responsible Officers in figures







Readers' comments
'Responsible Officers'??!! The whole concept appears to me to be totally irresponsible. Two days training to be able to judge whether a doc from any background/training/speciality is or is not fit for revalidation seems ludicrous. This smacks once again of this Government's attempts to exert control over the medical profession. Is it possible to ASK for referral to the GMC if the 'Responsible Officer' decides one doesnt 'tick all the right boxes'? At least the GMC have long experience and peer respect in this matter.