This site is intended for health professionals only


Pay GPs per contact rather than per patient, DAUK urges Government

Pay GPs per contact rather than per patient, DAUK urges Government

The Doctors’ Association UK (DAUK) has written to new health secretary Dr Thérèse Coffey asking for GPs to be paid per contact rather than per patient, amongst other requests.

The letter warns of up to 16 million patients being left without NHS GPs by 2030, using Health Foundation data that said the NHS will lose up to 8,800 full-time equivalent GPs within the decade.

The DAUK demanded an ‘overdue overhaul’ of practice finance, and said: ‘Finances need to reflect the number of contacts GPs deal with, rather than the current blanket ‘per patient, per year fee’ as per the Carr-Hill formula.’

GPs should be paid for administrative time as part of the standard contract too, they said, ‘to safely deal with the mountain of documents’, as is the norm for hospital doctors.

They also advised ‘pausing all PCN activity towards extending access’, and prioritising continuity of care instead.

DAUK’s other requests included:

  • Extending sickness self-certification to 28 days
  • Allowing pharmacists to substitute prescribed medication if out-of-stock
  • Adequate training for staff under the ARRS
  • Removing revalidation in the final five years of a GPs career
  • Removal of pension cap restrictions
  • Investment in better quality IT
  • New purpose-built premises
  • Allowing practices to use extra funding as they please

The letter references Dr Gail Milligan, who worked as a GP partner in Surrey and died on 27 July after becoming ‘overwhelmed’ with work.

‘This job is making us ill’, DAUK told Ms Coffey, echoing words said by Dr Milligan’s husband.

They also said they ‘trust that you are planning on visiting a GP surgery’, adding, ‘it did not go unnoticed by the 35,000 British GPs that several of your predecessors rarely visited a practice to get a first-hand understanding of the pressures we face every day’.

In July, outgoing RCGP chair Professor Martin Marshall said the Carr-Hill funding formula for practices in England ‘needs reworking very clearly’.

NHS England’s head of primary care also previously called for a ‘shift’ in GP funding allocations to support deprived practices.


          

READERS' COMMENTS [6]

Please note, only GPs are permitted to add comments to articles

Paul Hartley 20 September, 2022 4:12 pm

Crazy idea. Great opportunity for gaming the system

Decorum Est 20 September, 2022 11:55 pm

Current arrangement is crazy and not fit for purpose. We’ll see soon enough!

David Banner 21 September, 2022 12:04 am

They’d have better luck sending this wish list to the North Pole rather than the DOH.
Won’t happen. Move along, folks, nothing to see here.

Truth Finder 21 September, 2022 3:07 pm

Sure. Do it like the private sector. Time is money. The NHS cannot afford it.

Just My Opinion 21 September, 2022 4:22 pm

No no no.
The government will never, ever pay the going rate for a consultation. That’s why the hospitals are millions in debt despite being paid per contact, it’s a loss making activity. This really would be the death of GP. Go look at what NHS dentists are facing, if you can find one.

Extending sickness self-certification to 28 days
Main workload is the long term sick who pitch up regularly for their sick notes, so this won’t help much.

Allowing pharmacists to substitute prescribed medication if out-of-stock
Potentially dangerous and heavily reliant on the competence and confidence of the pharmacist.

Adequate training for staff under the ARRS
How about letting us employ the staff we actually want and need.

Removing revalidation in the final five years of a GPs career
How do you know when a GP is five years from retirement??

Removal of pension cap restrictions
Good idea.

Investment in better quality IT
Good idea.

New purpose-built premises
And be charged astronomical rent? No thank you.

Allowing practices to use extra funding as they please
Good idea, but contradicts the idea above about ARRS staff??

David Church 8 October, 2022 1:52 pm

Like ‘Just my Opinion’, i can agree with several of the DAUK’s demands, but do not see how payment per contact could be even counted, leave alone costed, and how do you know when you are 5 years from retirement?