GP APPOINTMENT PROBLEMS IN BRITAIN'S NHS

The health minister has admitted "it is not good enough", as a nationwide survey showed almost a third of patients are unable to make an appointment to see their GP more than three days in advance. A poll of almost 117,000 people across England by the Healthcare Commission found the majority were happy with the care they received from local doctors and dentists. But 30 per cent said they could not book an appointment three or more working days in advance.

Speaking on BBC Breakfast today, Health Minister Lord Warner said: "I have admitted it is not good enough, and that is why we want to take action with the public, and the BMA [British Medication Association] and the GPs to come up with a system which doesn't lose the urgent access within 48 hours, but at the same time produces flexibility. "And we know it can be done, because although a third or so, as the Healthcare Commissioner pointed out, of practices are not delivering this, what it shows is that two-thirds are delivering it."

He has previously said it was "unacceptable" that some practices were still not allowing patients to make advance appointments, adding: "There is absolutely no justification for this target being used as an excuse for an inflexible appointments system." Patients have complained that Government targets stating that patients should wait no more than 48 hours to see a GP, or 24 hours to see a primary care professional, have led to surgeries stopping advance bookings. Instead patients are told to call back nearer the time they want to be seen.

In April Prime Minister Tony Blair was put on the spot over the issue on BBC1's Question Time, when members of the audience told him they could only book appointments within 48 hours, or on the same day, because of Government targets. Today Diana Church, the woman who originally taxed Mr Blair, told BBC Breakfast she had tried to make an appointment a couple of weeks ago, saying: "I don't think it has got any better."

She told the programme she was "inundated" by people telling her they had tried to book in advance with their surgery: "They seem to have made access so much more fraught and more difficult. "The system possibly works well for people who can go to the doctors at the drop of a hat, drop everything and run to the doctors, and they suddenly manage to get an appointment, but most of us work, or have caring responsibilities, or we need to be able to organise our lives around being able to see the doctor when it is routine. I'm not talking about emergency appointments here." Noting that two weeks ago they were "completely denying there was a problem", she added: "That is just not the experience of people on the ground."

Source

***************************

For greatest efficiency, lowest cost and maximum choice, ALL hospitals and health insurance schemes should be privately owned and run -- with government-paid vouchers for the very poor and minimal regulation. Both Australia and Sweden have large private sector health systems with government reimbursement for privately-provided services so can a purely private system with some level of government reimbursement or insurance for the poor be so hard to do?

Comments? Email me here. If there are no recent posts here, the mirror site may be more up to date. My Home Page is here or here.

***************************