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

Revalidation identifies fewer than 1% of GPs needing remediation

GP leaders have branded revalidation as ‘a waste of time’ as official data revealed that less than 1% of all doctors actually needed remediation.

Figures obtained by Pulse show only 145 (0.7%) of the 23,289 GPs put through the process last year were not revalidated because they were still in an ‘ongoing process’ which GMC said included, but was not limited to, remediation proceedings.

It comes two years after revalidation was introduced, and as the GMC is entering the final year of a three-year process to revalidate all GPs who were registered with the regulator in 2012. After this, revalidation will continue in five-year cycles.

GPC contracts and regulations subcommittee chair Dr Robert Morley said the minimal number of doctors needing remediation suggested that the ‘incredibly burdensome process’ is ‘pretty much a waste of time’ and needed to be made less labour intensive.

In all, 20,741 of doctors (89%) were successfully revalidated on the first attempt last year, while some 10% did not complete the process because their responsible officer required more supporting information before being able to recommend revalidation. The remaining 0.3% (76 GPs) were found ‘not to engage’ with the revalidation process.

The figures were broadly the same the previous year, with 89% out of 16,021 GPs approved, 11% deferred for a lack of information and a marginal 0.4% deferred for remediation. Only 5 GPs did not engage.

GPs have previously complained that the GMC’s revalidation process, brought in from 2013/14 after a six-month period in which GP leaders and responsible officers were targeted, has become a ‘bureaucratic nightmare’ for some GPs, despite an initial promise from the regulator it would take only a day to complete.

GP leaders have also criticised the withdrawal of funding for available supporting tools, with some even suggesting GPs should be remunerated for their time spent completing ’70-hour marathons’ to gather the extensive documentation required.

NHS England area teams have withdrawn funding for the Clarity appraisal tool and the RCGP is charging new subscribers to the latest version of its toolkit.

A recent GMC report found that revalidation was a bigger than expected burden on GPs, with many spending more than double the six hours it was expected to take to prepare.

According to Dr Morley, there was a ‘postcode lottery’ for GPs as some responsible officers in different regions are asking for information that ‘goes beyond GMC requirements’.

Commenting on the data obtained by Pulse, he said: ‘It really does suggest that the incredibly burdensome process, and all the extra work and stress that it puts on GPs and the extra time involved in the appraisal process, is pretty much a waste of time.’

‘These figures suggest that a far simpler process would be much more fit for purpose, far better for doctors and far better for patients.’

The GMC is targeting a record 70,000 doctors for revalidation in 2015, with its business plan stating that it hopes it will ‘help… doctors to reflect on their practice, understand what they do well and how they can improve’, and that it will ‘drive up the standards of care that patients receive’.

Dr Peter Holden, a GP in Matlock Derbyshire who fought for simplification of the revalidation process as GPC negotiatior, said: ‘The system is functioning, with 99% of us up to scratch, but GPs are now doing this from their take-home pay. The bottom line is it needs a re-costing. None of us mind doing quality work, but quality has to be paid for.’

Readers' comments (32)

  • the rest of the world does not have this. Why us? why do UK GP;s thinks they are or need to be superior to the rest of the world? And why are the GMC hell bent on proving to the the public (the only ones they care about, not the doctors who actually fund them) that we are superior and over burdened with paper chasing exercise. All doctors reflect after every consultation, the hard work is putting it into writing. You don't need a doctor to do that, you need a degree in fiction writing to make it look worthwhile. scrap the whole lot and let doctors get on being doctors and looking after patients please.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • John Glasspool

    Reading this, it is 0.7% and not all of that "remediation". Thus, as we all knew, a complete waste of time but it keeps some box-tickers in a job.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Not just a waste of time . An expensive waste of time .

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • At least the GMC can no longer escape its responsibility for the next Shipman

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Is it possible that any of the doctors who fail revalidation and had to undergo remediation could have otherwise put a patients life at risk?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • "At least the GMC can no longer escape its responsibility for the next Shipman"

    Yes, because revalidation would have prevented a Shipman. Not.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I note the comment from the 'NHS manager'. A bit rich from someone who does not undergo revalidation him/herself - and who must therefore bear some vicarious responsibility for the failures of unregulated managers in North Staffs!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • No shit Sherlock- many if not most of the 145 referred for failing to get the paperwork together in time- got to jump the hoop and tick the box in time..or.....
    ANOther crazy wheeze thought up by mandarins without a clue- just like the concept of communism, although that one was nicely hijacked by marxists.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Dear NHS manager at 11.08 am,

    We all know that major systems failure leads to the death of many patients aka Stafford Hospital and all the hospitals through the country with excess mortality are now firmly NOT due to clinicians as they have all been revalidated!!! (corollary)
    However we know that the NHS mangers are different in these and they haven`t been revalidated , hence they MUST be the cause for these excess mortality!
    P.S
    I have pursued a Masters in management (as well as being a doctor), so do understand about Management.
    Have YOU done Medicine to understand what it is to be a doctor?
    Its numpties like this NHS Manager who cause the problem.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This was not about patient safety, and never has been. It was known it would not prevent anything andy this survey suggests so even more. It was about further wresting of control from a profession viewed too independent for its own good, with the aim- just like the CQC and colleges jumping on the academic bandwagon to promote their courses - of turning the profession into a malleable frightened flock easily pushed around. For the NHS manager, I prsume, of course you will consider the opporutnity cost of 100,000 of hours of GPs time wasted complying with the onerous requirements, of patients who might otherwise have been seen and had a preventable illness or death avoided, and of GPs who have been forced due to increasing beauracratic drivel being pushed out of the profession or this country, if you don't think revalidation, CQC and hoop jumping of this nature costs lives, then again,

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

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

Have your say