Over half of GPs say new online access changes have ‘negative effect’ on patient care
Over half (55%) of GPs have reported seeing ‘a negative effect on patient care’ due to the new online access requirements, a new BMA survey has found.
GPs told the BMA that they are getting urgent requests through the online portal ‘almost daily’ despite clear messaging that it should not be used for urgent queries.
The survey of 1,341 GPs found that 42% of practices have had to reduce face-to-face appointments, reducing the time patients spend with their GP. And 45% said they have had to redeploy staff to accommodate for the changes.
Despite GPs warning of the risk of patient harm, 74% of practices said they have seen an increase in workload, 68% reported an increase in stress, and 54% said there was an increase in working hours.
The BMA’s findings around patient safety reflect the results of Pulse’s own survey which found that patients are reporting life-threatening issue through the online forms, including breathing difficulties, severe vomiting, acute abdominal and chest pain, and rectal bleeding.
One GP responding to the BMA survey said they had received an online request at 6.20pm relating to a patient ‘with high fever’ and ‘bedbound being unable to move and breathless’, who required an ambulance to be taken into hospital to treat for sepsis.
Another GP said: ‘Keeping online consultations open until closing time, regardless of whether the practice has reached capacity, increases the likelihood of urgent requests being submitted that may not be processed before the end of operating hours.’
It comes after the BMA entered dispute with the Government over the changes, arguing that they are currently not safe to implement due to a lack of ‘appropriate safeguards’. Pulse exclusively revealed that the union had previously asked for the changes to be halted to address ‘significant concerns’ around patient safety.
Safeguards proposed by the BMA
Relevant safeguards could include:
- Engaging with IT software providers find IT solutions that work for patients and practitioners.
- Flexibilities in allowing practices to suspend online triage when they become overwhelmed on a working day and safe care is threatened.
- Increasing practice resources and staffing capacity to manage online requests and queries beyond the end of the currently contracted core hours of 8am – 6.30pm.
Source: BMA
BMA GP committee chair Dr Katie Bramall said: ‘Government is right that GP is the front door to the NHS, but they are wrong in refusing to understand how it works.
‘To have over 1,000 practices respond as quickly as they did, shows the impact of how badly government have chosen to embed these changes, with 6 in 10 remaining extremely unsupportive, and 2 in 10 somewhat unsupportive.
‘Over 4 in 10 are having to reduce the number of GP appointments they can offer to their patients so they can manage/triage online requests and queries instead. If government had chosen to listen to us and work with us, we could have made this so much more of a success.’
Dr Bramall added that ‘there is still ample opportunity’ for health secretary Wes Streeting to engage with the BMA and ‘help rebuild general practice’.
She said: ‘We will continue to comply with the changes brought in on 1 October 2025 under protest, whilst exploring all options on how best to deliver transformative and safe change for general practice in England.
‘Any action we take will be measured, informed, and undertaken only to defend GP partnerships and the safe, GP-led community-based care patients and their families rely upon.’
The England LMC conference earlier this month backed a motion for refusing online access compliance.
Pulse’s survey also found that a third of GPs and practice managers have indicated they would be willing to close for a day in protest at the new requirements.
It comes as Dr Bramall wrote an exclusive op-ed for Pulse yesterday, in which she denied that GPCE’s executive team had agreed to 1 October changes and misled the profession.
Related Articles
READERS' COMMENTS [8]
Please note, only GPs are permitted to add comments to articles
Patients are understandably happy with quicker online access, but that doesn’t change the reality that Partners are being pushed to work even harder for every penny (£250-300k per year). Convenience for the public shouldn’t come at the cost of exhausted partners who have no intention to loose their profits.
not sure what that figure you’re quoting pertains to? I’ve not seen any evidence to suggest patients are happier, either. The article can’t be remotely surprising to anyone and I imagine, as waiting to see us goes up, dissatisfaction will increase. Whether the BMA have the wit to deflect this or, better yet, use it is another matter
The patients that are happy with the change are keeping very quiet about it. Despite being the ones most likely to use social media.
The discourse is largely about the increased difficulty faced by those who actually need health care. That is older people, those with long term conditions, and people with pregnancies and young children.
It suggests that the focus groupthink in Westminster is misunderstanding, perhaps deliberately, the issues around access in General Practice.
These are that people want to see trained GPs that they can trust and see to develop a relationship with.
The provision of multiple professionals who are not able to offer the comprehensive care that GPs can frustrates people.
A solution to the urgent problem and end of day problem is to make sure the online system informs the patient their message is in a waiting list and will be looked at sometime in the coming week. If it is urgent please call the practice or if it is an emergency call 999.
I think most practices filter out emergencies but be very clear about it and then make sure the waiting list is at least two days long. So the population learn how it works. I would like to say I now work only in OOH and over the last few years have noticed a change that I can no longer advise a patient to contact their doctor tomorrow as they have no confidence they will get a response. While they learn that OOH will respond and triage over the phone with a doctor within a few hours. I used to confidently direct patient back to their own doctor if appropriate now I feel OOH is being used as a replacement for the day GP by increasing numbers of patients… and it is not good as we cannot refer or do investigations and unlikely they will see the same doctor again.
It’s great. I’m sitting in the surgery at 6.30 pm texting 20 patients the same message. “Thanks for sending in your e consult. It sounds like you need to see a clinician. Tomorrow morning give us a ring or stand in the 0800 a queue”.
Genius.
I have had not many messages today and a whole load of appts to give out. We kept them free in the past for the elderly, children, book on the day. But I’ve had no messages from any of those. All I’ve had is people in their 30s and 40s saying “i woke up today and itched my scalp once on the drive to work. I’m sat in a meeting now and wondering if I can have a 6pm appt please for review in case I have T cell lymphoma of the scalp?” and such other things (this is not an exact pt request). I am questioning what will happen if I just message them all back with a question mark and nothing else. The patients wouldn’t have phoned reception because of fear of being told what they need to be told, and then would’ve gone on a tirade on the daily fails comment section about GP receptionists thinking they are god whilst in their work meetings. Now, they message me.
It has been the case that the more routes for access you provide the more demand you generate- the majority of which demand would have been better asking grandma or a friend. The logical approach to reducing demand is to reduce routes of access so that only those who need to see their doctor actual access their doctor.
I would suggest going back to coming and booking an appt in person or even a sit and wait approach.
back to sit and wait; honestly; it will weed out the utter guff