Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Letters

The 10-minute appointment

Penny Flaxman
British Journal of General Practice 2015; 65 (640): 573-574. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp15X687313
Penny Flaxman
Leicestershire. E-mail:
Roles: GP
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: penelope.flaxman@nhs.net
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

In an RCGP news item1 issued to coincide with the publication of the discussion paper Patient safety implications of general practice workload,2 reference is made to the ‘constraints of the standard 10-minute GP–patient consultation’. The paper itself discusses the safety implications of fatigue, and states that individuals are more likely to make mistakes when ‘late’, but there is no mention of the role of the 10-minute appointment.

It is implausible that extra funding or staffing in primary care would reduce the number or complexity of the problems which patients wish to discuss in an appointment, so should we reconsider the use of the 10-minute appointment?

Why have 10-minute appointments become a problem? Some of the causes are beyond our control: an ageing population with multiple comorbidities, a shift of care from secondary to primary care, and increased patient expectations. Others are a direct result of changes we have made: by delegating routine reviews, minor illnesses, and other straightforward cases to other healthcare professionals. And by using 5-minute telephone consultations instead of face-to-face reviews we have pruned the ‘quick’ consultations from our own surgeries and left our lists full of complex physical problems and time-consuming psychosocial issues. For medicolegal reasons we also spend longer documenting our consultations. Busy patients, not unreasonably, hope that we will deal with all their problems at one appointment, and when we ‘run late’ our waiting patients have time to convert their various ailments and concerns into a very concrete problem list.

When a patient’s problem(s) are not able to be safely and effectively dealt with in a 10-minute appointment there are only three possible outcomes: the problems are not adequately dealt with, they are dealt with but take longer than 10 minutes, or the patient is asked to make a further appointment. All of these outcomes are bad for patients and stressful for doctors.

If we could improve both patient care and GP morale by increasing the length of our appointments, what have we to lose? If instead of having 18 10-minute appointments we have 18 12½-minute appointments our surgery would be 45 minutes longer, but that would be partly offset against the time we normally ‘run late’ and a reduction in repeat appointments. We might worry that ‘quick’ consultations or patient DNAs would cause wasted GP time. In reality, there are jobs that we can do without leaving our desks that are quick and interruptible: post, pathology results, prescriptions.

Changing appointment length is simple to trial, and reversible. As GPs seeking ‘the courage to change the things we can’, should we now seek to improve patient care and reduce our own stress levels by consigning 10-minute appointments to the history books and declaring that they are no longer fit for purpose?

  • © British Journal of General Practice 2015

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    GP fatigue a ‘risk’ to patient safety warns RCGP, Royal College of General Practitioners. http://www.rcgp.org.uk/news/2015/july/gp-fatigue-a-risk-to-patient-safety-warns-rcgp.aspx (accessed 7 Oct 2015).
  2. 2.↵
    (July, 2015) Patient safety implications of general practice workload, Royal College of General Practitioners. http://www.rcgp.org.uk/policy/rcgp-policy-areas/~/media/Files/Policy/A-Z-policy/2015/RCGP-Patient-safety-implications-of-general-practice-workload-July-2015.ashx (accessed 7 Oct 2015).
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 65 (640)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 65, Issue 640
November 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The 10-minute appointment
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The 10-minute appointment
Penny Flaxman
British Journal of General Practice 2015; 65 (640): 573-574. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp15X687313

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
The 10-minute appointment
Penny Flaxman
British Journal of General Practice 2015; 65 (640): 573-574. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp15X687313
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • REFERENCES
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Development and external validation of a new clinical prediction model for early recognition of sepsis
  • Author response
  • Recommendations for the recognition, diagnosis, and management of long COVID
Show more Letters

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2022 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242