If I were in charge… Rule No.3
Rule 3. The ‘named GP’ must retain a measure of control over how that clinical care is delivered.
This is more nebulous and needs further refining. Fundamentally, this is to protect patients against the worse excesses of top-down central government control over patient care and retain the capability to meet local need.
I think this control could vary from model to model. I think that there are very few models of primary care in this country that work as well as the democratic medium-sized practice with a strong primary health care team all contributing to the care of patients. The input of clinicians in this model is readily apparent. However, I do not think it is necessarily the only model of care that could work for the whole of the country.
A salaried ‘named GP’ in a larger company would still have to have an input. The company would be expected to demonstrate, as part of its contract to deliver primary care, that it is responsive to input from clinicians.
People complain about a ‘postcode lottery’ but local variation in care is essential to meet local differences in health care need. I think there is scope for variation in the delivery of care and (shh, say it quietly) there may well be some areas, perhaps severely deprived urban areas, that will benefit from a polyclinic. If they met these three rules then I would be more relaxed about Darzi.
sort of agree
but id perfer the patient to have control of “how care is delivered”
I take the point – when I wrote it I did onsider the patient angle – I only didn’t add it as I regard it as pretty much a given these days with any of the models.