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
Life & Times

Debrief: Consultation length matters

Euan Lawson
British Journal of General Practice 2019; 69 (682): 241. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp19X702473
Euan Lawson
Email:
Roles: Deputy Editor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: euanlawson@gmail.com
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Published eLetters

eLetter submission guidelines

Submit a Response to This Article
Compose eLetter

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com. PLEASE NOTE: your email address will be published.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Jump to comment:

  • We need a clear vision for primary care
    Sarah C. Evans
    Published on: 12 May 2019
  • Consultation length matters
    Crispin A H Fisher
    Published on: 12 May 2019
  • Consultation length, why are we not changing? Inertia or income protection
    Nicholas Sharvill
    Published on: 01 May 2019
  • Published on: (12 May 2019)
    Page navigation anchor for We need a clear vision for primary care
    We need a clear vision for primary care
    • Sarah C. Evans, Locum GP working in urgent treatment centre, Herts Urgent Care
    Euan Lawson1 argues that we could lengthen our consultation times. Changing surgery times would destabilise practices already on the knife-edge. Our partnership model developed in the 1960s and was still working well in the 1980s. Then, maybe we did see or speak to around 30 people a day, now suggested as a safe limit by the recent PULSE workload study.2 
     
    Young doctors won’t commit to joining partnerships, where the capitation model compels doctors to process 40-60 appointments per day with a further punishing hundred or so clinical decisions to be made in letters,...
    Show More
    Euan Lawson1 argues that we could lengthen our consultation times. Changing surgery times would destabilise practices already on the knife-edge. Our partnership model developed in the 1960s and was still working well in the 1980s. Then, maybe we did see or speak to around 30 people a day, now suggested as a safe limit by the recent PULSE workload study.2 
     
    Young doctors won’t commit to joining partnerships, where the capitation model compels doctors to process 40-60 appointments per day with a further punishing hundred or so clinical decisions to be made in letters, messages or results. Yet senior GPs can’t let go of it, with cost-rent, CCG money and out of hours businesses paying their school fees and their pensions.
     
    There is a danger that vested interest is holding us back. General practice is evidently broken, yet we flounder, debating continuity and telephone triage. We need a firm, shared, vision for primary care which includes what a reasonable workload is, safe for us and for patients.
     
    We need to be part of an organisation large enough not just to employ a multitude of colleagues: sub-specialist GPs; specialist nurses; extended role practitioners; diagnostic physiotherapists; call-handlers; pharmacologists (and more) but also to train us. It will research and implement the structures able to assign the right person for each task. Our future organisations will be large enough to mesh without of hours services. Appointments will be accessible. Our reformed service will re-gain first world cancer outcomes and reverse deteriorating life expectancy.
     
    Taking primary care into the future requires the College to rise above the vested interests of its officers. It needs to set standards for doctors in primary care which may not be achievable in partnerships existing today. With this model behind us, and a clear College ruling on what is a safe workload for one doctor in one day, we could confidently take to the streets. Ending ten minute consultations with a new approach to primary care will enable us to offer something approaching excellence once again.
     
    References
    1. Lawson E. Debrief: Consultation length matters. Br J Gen Pract 2019; 69 (682): 241. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp19X702473.
    2. Pulse. Workload survey: “We are working beyond the safe level”. www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/hot-topics/pulses-gp-workload-survey/workload-survey-we-are-working-beyond-the-safe-level/20038667.article (accessed 10 May 2019).
     
    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
  • Published on: (12 May 2019)
    Page navigation anchor for Consultation length matters
    Consultation length matters
    • Crispin A H Fisher, GP, The Marches Surgery, Leominster, Herefordshire
    Euan Lawson is right to draw our attention to the length of the GP consultation in the UK. Reference to martyrdom is not required. GPs and their practices have it within their gift to make the changes required to move from 10 to 15 minute consultations. We have recently done so at our own practice, and it would be fair to say that it has been the single most beneficial change in my 21 years at the practice. There has been a reduction in GP stress and anxiety (running late suits no-one), morale has improved correspondingly, and...
    Show More
    Euan Lawson is right to draw our attention to the length of the GP consultation in the UK. Reference to martyrdom is not required. GPs and their practices have it within their gift to make the changes required to move from 10 to 15 minute consultations. We have recently done so at our own practice, and it would be fair to say that it has been the single most beneficial change in my 21 years at the practice. There has been a reduction in GP stress and anxiety (running late suits no-one), morale has improved correspondingly, and patients are now given more time for their problems. We calculated that we would lose about 70 GP appointments across the week to achieve the change. In preparation for the move, these have been more than replaced by employment of nurse practitioners, a paramedic, a musculoskeletal FCP, and most recently, a mental health nurse FCP.
     
    Many practices are moving to 15 minute appointments, and we would urge others to plan to so do. We may even find it adds a few more precious years to GP careers.
     
    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
  • Published on: (1 May 2019)
    Page navigation anchor for Consultation length, why are we not changing? Inertia or income protection
    Consultation length, why are we not changing? Inertia or income protection
    • Nicholas Sharvill, Locum/portfolio GP, Kent
    I have experience of working as a locum in both 10 and 15 minute systems and as an appraiser of practices where they have changed.
     
    Put it perhaps a little simply one obstacle is that other staff may need to be employed to deal with repeats and Docman to free Dr time. This may reduce income in the NHS GP system. without a reduction in the working day. Bizarrely increasing quality and probably reducing prescriptions and referrals may also cost the GP income.
     
    Competing Interests: None declared.
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 69 (682)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 69, Issue 682
May 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Download PowerPoint
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.
Debrief: Consultation length matters
(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
Debrief: Consultation length matters
Euan Lawson
British Journal of General Practice 2019; 69 (682): 241. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp19X702473

Citation Manager Formats

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

Share
Debrief: Consultation length matters
Euan Lawson
British Journal of General Practice 2019; 69 (682): 241. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp19X702473
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
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Where I end and you begin: additional roles in British general practice
  • Yonder #100: Nasal sprays, obstetric ultrasound, binge eating disorder, and emergency departments
  • Virtuoso general practice
Show more Life & Times

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