Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Lupus / November 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Thousands of patients are being denied access to hospital consultants  because the NHS has set up schemes to block GP's referrals

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
J - 11 Nov 2006 00:08 GMT
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1939882,00.html

Managers block NHS access
Administrators are intercepting GPs' referrals and turning patients away
in a bid to save money

Jo Revill, health editor
Sunday November 5, 2006 The Observer

Thousands of patients are being denied access to hospital consultants
because the NHS has set up money-saving management schemes which block
GPs' referrals.

In direct contradiction to the government's claims to be encouraging more
choice in healthcare, patients with rheumatoid arthritis, knee problems
and eye and skin conditions are being targeted by managers who intercept
referral letters and send them back to GPs or into physiotherapy clinics
rather than allowing them to be seen by the appropriate specialist.

The scale of the interference has led some GPs to use extraordinary
subterfuges to get their patients to a surgeon. One practice in Merseyside
has decided to send letters marked 'private and confidential' to the
surgeons when they need a referral, rather than using the usual computer
system which would automatically block the request.

Another doctor told The Observer that he uses handwritten letters to
hospitals outside his area which he knows will not be blocked from taking
patients.

As the NHS struggles to deal with £620m of debt, administrators are using
referral management schemes to curb hospital admissions and to cut waiting
lists. The schemes start to operate once a GP sends an electronic letter
to a hospital consultant, requesting an appointment for the patient.

The letter is scanned by administrators who decide whether it constitutes
an 'appropriate' referral. If they deem it unnecessary, the patient is
'bounced' back to a clinic within the primary care trust, or to a nurse
manager or a physiotherapy clinic if it is an orthopaedic problem.

The British Medical Association has warned ministers that the plans are
threatening the relationship between a GP and patients, and that this goes
against the choice agenda even though the government is adamant that the
schemes can save millions of pounds.

Angry GPs in Merseyside are faxing referrals directly to a consultant to
stop managers intercepting them. They are also posting letters marked
'private and confidential' to prevent hospital staff from opening them,
and pushing patients back into the GP clinics. Doctors at a practice in St
Helens said they were forced to take the action after patients they had
referred for orthopaedic, rheumatology and physiotherapy were being
diverted away from Whiston Hospital in Prescot to a physiotherapy clinic.

A family doctor in Hertfordshire said that he had started to send
orthopaedic patients to a hospital outside their local area, so that he
knows they will see a surgeon. Dr Gerry Bulger is upset that his local
body, Dacorum primary care trust, set up a system which means that
patients with rheumatoid arthritis or orthopaedic problems cannot get an
appointment with a consultant; instead they are sent to see a
physiotherapist or another GP, who then decides what to do.

Dr Bulger said: 'Sometimes I write a hand-written letter to a hospital
which I know will accept them, to get round the diktat. How can the
government talk about giving patients choice when they are not allowed in
at the front door?'

Evidence from almost 100 PCTs found huge variations in the way GP
referrals are being handled, with some trusts using the centres to cut up
to 15 per cent of referrals. Orthopaedics, dermatology and physiotherapy
were the disciplines where referral management was most prevalent. As a
result, almost half the country's dermatology departments are suffering
from a huge loss of workload and some may have to close, as patients are
siphoned back into GP clinics.

Dr Jonathan Field, consultant leader for the BMA, said: 'Some of the
referrals from one consultant to another in the same hospital are now
being blocked, which is dangerous because it introduces really long
delays.'

In north London, all outpatient follow-up appointments are being stopped
unless the patient has cancer and GPs will be expected to check on
patients. All referrals for skin conditions are being banned unless GPs
stress it is urgent.

Enfield primary care trust is bringing in the measures in the next two
weeks to save £5.5m. Every referral to a hospital specialist is now being
screened by a panel of GPs, clinicians and hospital specialists under a
referral management system known as the Specialist Clinical Assessment
Service. A spokeswoman for Enfield primary care trust said the changes are
in line with government policy to encourage patients to be treated in
primary care near their homes.

A spokesperson for the Department of Health said: 'Referral management
schemes should ensure NHS patients see the most appropriate clinician in
the most convenient setting. These schemes must only be set up where they
will benefit patients.'
Cindy M - 11 Nov 2006 13:48 GMT
J...
Good to see you...
Haven't seen you posting lately...but it could just be me...
Hope everything is ok...
Cindy
> http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1939882,00.html
>
[quoted text clipped - 91 lines]
> the most convenient setting. These schemes must only be set up where they
> will benefit patients.'
Beverley - 12 Nov 2006 03:43 GMT
And there are people here in the USA want a national health care system?
Geez! Our system has its flaws but at least we are free to see who we want
and when we want.
Bev

> http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1939882,00.html
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> Jo Revill, health editor
> Sunday November 5, 2006 The Observer
Sherry - 12 Nov 2006 15:07 GMT
How sad (maybe even criminal) that medical systems/insurance companies/
HMO's/ PPO's  in any country can set up systems and schemes that can keep
the insured from getting medical care that they need.  I have never
understood having to go to your gp pay the gp visit so you can get a
referral to a specialist.  Seems like a waist of time and money to me....if
you need a OBGYN, a Rheumy, a neurologist, or any other "specialist" most
people "know" who they need to see for what condition/illness etc.

There has to be a system that works for all regardless of their finances and
or "social" standing.  I am one of those people in the USA that would like
to see a national health care system....I beleive that my family and
neighbors have as much right to affordable & appropriate health care
(medical, dental, and optical) as the people whose health care is provided
by our tax dollars.  What is fair about a system that provides "free"
medical care for some, forces some to loose everything they have (or just
not go and suffer maybe even die) or makes a rich man a poor man and the
elderly loose their homes?

The same "games" that J's posted article exposes on the "money saving
management" are also happening with private insurance and group insurance
here in this country daily!

There has to be an answer!!!!!!

Hugs.
Sherry

> And there are people here in the USA want a national health care system?
> Geez! Our system has its flaws but at least we are free to see who we want
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>> Jo Revill, health editor
>> Sunday November 5, 2006 The Observer
Maggie - 13 Nov 2006 22:50 GMT
> How sad (maybe even criminal) that medical systems/insurance companies/
> HMO's/ PPO's  in any country can set up systems and schemes that can keep
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> Hugs.
> Sherry

Well said, Sherry!  Bless your heart...I've never seen you talk so
much...LoL!  You go girl!
Sherry - 13 Nov 2006 23:19 GMT
Maggie, some things just get me riled up....most of the time I know when to
keep my mouth shut <g>  This wasn't one of them.

Hugs,
Sherry

> Well said, Sherry!  Bless your heart...I've never seen you talk so
> much...LoL!  You go girl!
Beverley - 14 Nov 2006 13:18 GMT
We're actually quite close to a national system. Many states have set up
insurance programs for those at the low end of the scale. In Virginia small
children have complete access to medical care - it's like an HMO as do any
folks on food stamps, welfare, etc.

The problem is those in the middle. The ones who don't have health insurance
because it is not offered where they work or they can't afford it. We're
back to the working poor. They are the ones that tend to be hurt the most.

If I had to do this dental surgery without insurance we could not really
have afforded it. I guess I would have figured out how to pay for it, out of
pocket, but it would have really hurt us financially.
Bev

> How sad (maybe even criminal) that medical systems/insurance companies/
> HMO's/ PPO's  in any country can set up systems and schemes that can keep
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
> >> Jo Revill, health editor
> >> Sunday November 5, 2006 The Observer
Andy - 13 Nov 2006 17:04 GMT
>And there are people here in the USA want a national health care system?
>Geez! Our system has its flaws but at least we are free to see who we want
>and when we want.
>Bev

As I understand it, so are we ... provided we have private medical
insurance, or a well-stuffed piggy bank.
Signature

Andy Taylor [Chair, N E Lupus Group]
See http://www.northeastlupus.org.uk for more!

Maggie - 13 Nov 2006 22:47 GMT
Bev wrote:
And there are people here in the USA want a national health care
system?
Geez! Our system has its flaws but at least we are free to see who we
want
and when we want.
Bev

As I understand it, so are we ... provided we have private medical
insurance, or a well-stuffed piggy bank.

Hmmm....the irony.  If we have private insurance (with most, anyway),
we must have a referral to see a specialist in the USA, whereas if you
DON'T have private insurance in the UK, you have to have a referral to
see a specialist.
Andy - 14 Nov 2006 10:03 GMT
>Bev wrote:
>And there are people here in the USA want a national health care
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>DON'T have private insurance in the UK, you have to have a referral to
>see a specialist.

Sorry, no, I didn't mean that. What I meant was that if you (or your
insurance) can pay, then you can be referred to a specialist without
some bean-counter blocking it. You'd still be going through a GP, though
- who could also be private. Even private specialists dislike a patient
turning up and saying "I have Frog disease, which I have researched on
the Internet; here's my cash; kindly cure it".
Signature

Andy Taylor [Chair, N E Lupus Group]
See http://www.northeastlupus.org.uk for more!

Beverley - 14 Nov 2006 13:09 GMT
Frog Disease, hmmm, so that is what they call it when you are croaking.
Bev

> Sorry, no, I didn't mean that. What I meant was that if you (or your
> insurance) can pay, then you can be referred to a specialist without
> some bean-counter blocking it. You'd still be going through a GP, though
> - who could also be private. Even private specialists dislike a patient
> turning up and saying "I have Frog disease, which I have researched on
> the Internet; here's my cash; kindly cure it".
Maggie - 14 Nov 2006 21:28 GMT
> Frog Disease, hmmm, so that is what they call it when you are croaking.
> Bev

To Andy:  You walked right into that one! :P
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.