Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

GPs should boycott seven-day services

Dr Karim Adab argues extending access damages patient care

The news earlier this month that a quarter of the extended hours pilots have cut their opening hours was hardly a surprise. It was always going to be the case that, once the appropriate headlines had been generated and initial interest waned, that they would struggle to recruit both punters and GPs alike. 

In Manchester these extended hours sessions were initially relatively popular with GPs. Indeed, until taking up a permanent position earlier this year I would generally take a couple a month. The work was not arduous, facilitated by intelligent use of IT offering direct access to a patient’s records and the ability to record your consultations in the very same pages. The clinical case mix was supposed to resemble more closely that of what you’d encounter during working hours: cholesterol checks, BPs, routine appointments. There was access, convenience, a brave new world.

The reality, however, was much more as you’d expect: same-day sore throats, coughs and colds, and instant second opinions.

I even saw one chap twice in a day, after declining to issue antibiotics in morning surgery (although perhaps that reveals more about my communication skills). The flavour was more ‘out of hours-lite’ than ‘waiting room full of Ordinary Working People eager to see a doctor in their leisure time’. 

Also, even with the benefit of medical notes only so much can be done regarding a chronic problem, as experienced OOH GPs will confirm. There is just no substitute for continuity of care; cases requiring long-term decision making are often better deferred to a patient’s regular GP.

‘Consistency of care is essential for good quality disease management’

We all know that if you ask two medics you’ll get three opinions. Consistency of message - and care - is essential for good quality disease management and health promotion - doctor ping pong is not.

Enthusiasm for the project has also been variable. Initially many slots went unfilled, until the home surgeries were invited to use them as free ‘extras’.

Some patients just plain refused to attend their nearest hub: ‘Have you seen where it is? I’m not travelling there after dark.’

At the time of writing there appear to be nearly twenty unfilled shifts during August, which may correspond to peak holiday season and scarcity of locum GPs, but more likely reflects a growing trend of disinterest among GPs evident since the start of the year. 

Should this trend continue, thinking will invariably tend toward widening the ‘skill mix’, to borrow the euphemism. The prospect of exposing untrained physician associates - or whoever - to the increased risk of autonomous, out-of-hours clinical decision making would represent convenience thrown to folly. 

I’m grateful for my colleagues’ endeavours and proactive thinking, but I firmly believe that it’s better to refine rather than to replicate. We already have - locally at least - excellent out of hours initiatives in GoToDoc and Mastercall, which would face cannibalisation by the scheme. Why aren’t we looking to embolden existing models, to work with rather than against them? A surfeit of choice is the enemy of the good decision.

This brings me to my original point: more and different is not necessarily in patients’ best interests. Despite extensive media campaigning, we are still unable to appropriately direct the public to the right service at the right time.

Perhaps we should just give up on this as as bad job? People don’t want to go to their pharmacy or GP - they’re more attracted to the big shiny building with the bright lights and the ‘proper doctors’.

Is the Manchester pilot a realistic direction of travel or are we just saying ‘Yes, Prime Minister’ in the hope that they’ll leave us alone?

To use a popular political aphorism, let’s be clear about this: the problem is not access. If the question is, ‘Do you want more?’, the answer will always be yes.

The problem is demand, and how we currently fail to address it. People still present too late with disease and early with ephemera. Public health education, through no fault of its own, is woefully inadequate.

Imagine if the Government were interested in a national self-care campaign, starting from absolute basics, brought into the curriculum, encouraged in the private sector. The problem is that the real weather-makers, the press, are less interested in headlines such as ‘JOHNNY LEARNS ABOUT VIRUSES’ than they are ‘HUNT SAYS: TIME TO KNUCKLE DOWN, GPS’.

By offering a fig leaf to political indecency we instead expose ourselves, because there’s space here to do something more creative than simply duplicating existing services.

We need to ask our patients some honest questions about what they want, and be honest about what we can realistically provide. 

Dr Karim Adab is a GP in Manchester

Rate this article  (4.8100000000000005 average user rating)

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Readers' comments (25)

  • Interesting
    Agree scheme makes no sense
    Impairs continuity
    Diverts resources from more valuable areas eg patient education re self care appropriate use our nhs ooh services
    Encourages moronic politicians to encourage more vote catching schemes encouraging unfulfillable inappropriate want
    Reduces GP morale encourages early retirement and emigration
    No evidence cost effectiveness or reduction aed attendance..more sense to have attached GP unit aed to educate and turn away sometimes to ooh service
    Worst diverts tight resources from proven front line care
    Confuses public ?why ooh encourage self care yet this encourages instant access for minor illness
    What is wrong with insisting or legislating employers fulfill their responsibility by allowing time off for necessary care.. Of course Cameron wants their votes and likes Victorian stupid and short sighted ultimately self defeating selfish idiocy.
    Better carry on with voluntary extended hours but INSIST only for f/t workers...now that makes sense.
    Hope this ignorant politicians demagogic idea dies in infancy before it does more damage
    GPs IMHO should avoid with a barge pole and then it will soon succumb.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • [Comment removed]

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Hit the nail on the head!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I would argue that there is too much public education.It all seems to follow a very familiar pattern:"that symptom might be a sign of an early cancer.Go and see your GP quick".On top of that you have experts saying that GPs aren't doing enough.All this is fuelling demand with no resources to match.So it's difficult to blames patients in all cases.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Vinci Ho

    (1) Excellent dissection and analysis with good insight of somebody actually working in the scheme. The honesty is far more important than the rhetoric and statistics pushed forward by the protagonist(s).
    (2) Populism is a product of public education . Public education can be an end product of political spinning. That is why an anti-spinning campaign is so important. Our patients deserve a correctly guided education , not some political hypnosis by some despicable , dishonest and shallow politicians.
    (3) As I said before, this is a time of a revolution. If we all take one more tiny step forward against a tyranny which literally is trying to burn down the flag of NHS , the ultimate tidal effect can be enormous .....

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • There's the rub. In spite of seeing almost 85% of all face to face consultations on 6% of the budget [ here NI], we are not doing enough. If only GPs would do more.
    Perhaps we GPs should start to define what is enough. Till WE do, don't the papers, politicians or patients for saying we don't do enough. All they can see is long waits for appointments.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Excellent article Karim. Ivan Benett needs to respond to this.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Ivan 'we need 25hour's a day opening'! Gordon Bennet..........

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Work out what we can supply for the given budget -and supply that . What is a GP worth per hour ?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Ivan & Hunt need to read this; http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/your-practice/practice-topics/employment/professor-martin-roland-even-5000-new-gps-will-not-be-enough/20010609.article#.VbYJZ7NVhHw

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

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

Have your say

IMPORTANT: On Wednesday 7 December 2016, we implemented a new log in system, and if you have not updated your details you may experience difficulties logging in. Update your details here. Only GMC-registered doctors are able to comment on this site.