There are 10 appointments left for today. There are 10,000 patients. My three colleagues are here all day, but one can't help with the home visits. They have a meeting about commissioning services in the local area. A brilliant idea from the government. But there is no time or money allocated for them to attend this meeting. So that means there are just three of us. At 8.10 there are 20 patients waiting for me to ring them back. At 8.30 there are 53.
We are currently in an professional environment where research-driven process is not being balanced by common sense. Even with all its failings there should always be a place for the dissenting voice born through experience to keep in check the march of the technocrat born through academic research.
I am an apologist for general practice. There, I have declared my bias. Despite having been a GP for over 30 years I remain in awe of my colleagues and the way that they continue to carry out an incredibly difficult job in an increasingly onerous environment. Almost without question, all my peers entered a career in medicine driven by a vocation to help their fellow man...
Professor David Haslam, chairman of the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), says in an interview with the Daily Telegraph, that patients should be more pro-active about their health and 'pushier' with their GPs. How realistic is his view, and where does our responsibility towards ourselves as patients start and that of a medical professional end?
By 2020, 40% of healthcare will be accessed online. That's the prediction of Professor Clare Gerada, until recently the chair of the Royal College of GPs. Her claims have generated much debate, which crystallised around one central objection - the argument that online health services are not inclusive.
I grew up believing that doctors were on a higher level than the rest of us. Their knowledge was vast and mysterious, their advice kept us healthy... What really struck me recently is that medical staff are twice as likely to get addicted to drugs or alcohol than the general public. How can this be possible?
When it's their word against yours, medical evidence is what proves you're not the one lying. Medical evidence is what says that you are in pain, or you are blind, or you are mentally ill. It's what confirms that you aren't making things up or exaggerating. It's what tells the decision maker to believe your evidence over what the Atos assessor said, or simply to believe your evidence at all.
The use of social media in the healthcare industry has taken an interesting turn this week with a patient tweeting about his experience with a local GP clinic. The disgruntled man tweeted that the staff were a bunch of 'incompetent tw*ts' and was subsequently removed from the clinic's list of patients.