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
Out of Hours

Reducing general practice workload

Des Spence
British Journal of General Practice 2016; 66 (649): 431. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp16X686401
Des Spence
Maryhill Health Centre, Glasgow.
Roles: GP
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

With Brexit, normal politics is suspended and no new resources are coming to general practice any time soon. We are in the midst of a workload crisis and the worse it gets, the more difficult it is to recruit — so down and down we spin. But ‘Adversity reveals genius, prosperity conceals it’ (Horace), so time to make do and mend. Some practices are experimenting with total telephone triage systems, while others are using Skype and e-mail solutions. General practice has tried such initiatives before — they are doomed to fail. For the call centre approach misses all the important soft signs of medical care. Consider the demise of NHS Direct: starting with a fanfare but ending with risk-averse, bureaucratic, foot-long protocols, ambulance calling, and an expensive whimper. Other recycled old ideas involve substituting doctors with nurses and pharmacists, but the impact is limited.1 Lastly, the academic dream of computer algorithms replacing doctors won’t ever work (anyway, we already have robotic, non-sentient care — they are called hospitals). There is no substitute for a face-to-face consultation with a doctor.

If we are unable to offer more supply of doctors, then we must reduce demand. What is driving this escalating demand for care in today’s largely disease-free Britain? We can blame a scaremongering media, Dr Google, or those dumb popularist disease-awareness campaigns. But they are not to blame. A society’s health-seeking behaviour is in fact the product of the clinical practice of their doctors. Fanning health anxiety makes patients return and return. In most countries, patients are simply a raw material used to manufacture money for doctors and hospitals. So medicalising the human existence is just good business! This explains the observed diverse and divergent health-seeking and beliefs of different nationalities. The current clinical practice of us GPs is responsible for the increasing demands on general practice in the UK.

I shall illustrate this bitter truth. Don’t prescribe antibiotics for ‘sore throat’, because patients are much less likely to return for a sore throat subsequently; prescribe, and they will return every time.2 This is the forgotten ‘numbers needed not to treat’ effect, and holds true of every aspect of our care. Antidepressants: most of our observed benefit of antidepressants is merely the placebo response, with any actual benefits being marginal3 or non-existent.4,5 Yet prescribing antidepressants has a far-reaching cascade effect on our time. Likewise, for sleeping tablets and benzodiazepines; opioids and gabapentinoids have an equally desperate research base but prescribing is increasing, consuming vast quantities of our time daily.

And this effect is even more complex than mere prescribing. How much work does one hospital referral create? How much of our time is spent managing minor abnormalities found in unnecessary blood tests and other investigations? Yet prescribing, referral, and investigation rates vary wildly between doctors working in the same area6 and can only reflect differences in clinical practice, not burden of disease. And here is another truth: there is too much medicine and less medicine is almost universally better medicine. Iatrogenic harm is the spectre in today’s world of polypharmacy for all.

So the debate about workload in general practice should in reality be a debate about clinical practice. If we want to reduce stress and workload the solution is in our hands only. We need to prescribe less, intervene less, and refer less. This can be done at practice level by implementing non-prescribing policies, actively stopping medications, and analysing referral patterns. Nationally, GPs need to seize total ownership of primary care guidelines, and kick off the idiot aristocrat specialists who know nothing of primary epidemiology and project unrealistic guidance from flawed hospital-based research. Finally, good medicine can only be achieved through good access, and good access can only be achieved by less medicine.

  • © British Journal of General Practice 2016

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination
    (June, 2015) Enhancing access in primary care settings, https://www.york.ac.uk/media/crd/Ev%20briefing_Enhancing%20access%20in%20primary%20care.pdf (accessed 4 Jul 2016).
  2. 2.↵
    1. Little P,
    2. Williamson I,
    3. Warner G
    (1997) Open randomised trial of prescribing strategies in managing sore throat. BMJ 314(7082):722–727.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Arroll B,
    2. Elley CR,
    3. Fishman T,
    4. et al.
    (2009) Antidepressants versus placebo for depression in primary care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 8(3):CD007954.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    1. Fournier JC,
    2. DeRubeis RJ,
    3. Hollon SD,
    4. et al.
    (2010) Antidepressant drug effects and depression severity: a patient-level meta-analysis. JAMA 303(1):47–53.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Kirsch I,
    2. Deacon BJ,
    3. Huedo-Medina TB,
    4. et al.
    (2008) Initial severity and antidepressant benefits: a meta-analysis of data submitted to the Food and Drug Administration. PLoS Med 5(2):e45.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Hawkes N
    (2012) Urgent referrals for suspected cancer vary threefold among general practices. BMJ 345:e5195.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 66 (649)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 66, Issue 649
August 2016
  • 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.
Reducing general practice workload
(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
Reducing general practice workload
Des Spence
British Journal of General Practice 2016; 66 (649): 431. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp16X686401

Citation Manager Formats

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

Share
Reducing general practice workload
Des Spence
British Journal of General Practice 2016; 66 (649): 431. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp16X686401
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

  • Every home should have one: the critical role of the research librarian
  • Fakery and science
  • Viewpoint: Redundant subjectivity?
Show more Out of Hours

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