At 06:50 31/08/1996 +0100, Mary H wrote:
>
>we seem to be being pushed towards a model of "primary led purchasing"
>at a very local level, and I need to know - urgently - whether the same
>is happening in other parts of the country.
>In view of the lurkers, could anyone with experience - or views - email
>me direct?
This should be discussed openly:-)
Primary-care-led-purchasing, IMHO, is nothing short of the biggest con (well
one of them any way) perpetrated by the DoH. As a third-wave fundholder, and
isn't fundholding a form of PCLP?, I can say it just doesn't happen. Well it
doesn't happen around here. As a memeber of the HA/LMC Commissioning Group I
can say it just doesn't happen, around here.
And why not?
The HA sets the core contracts and we can't change them. Ok you can send
patients to different hospitals in search of "quality", but all we buy is a
product which we have no influence over.
I've been trying to get hold of the HA contracts for months. I have been
given a single sheet from a huge wad of papers listing the clinical services
provided by one of the local trusts. It basically says: speciality - service
to provide. all on one sheet of paper:-(. The rest is do with accountancy
and charter standards.
eg Haematology will provide a clinical haematology service including the
monitoring of warfarin (actually this is paraphrased and probably longer
than the original).
The South Yorkshire Quality statements is another wad of papers. It is 99%
to do with charter standards. To take an example of really relevant stuff to
me - 80% of immediate discharge letters should be *sent* within 48 working
hours to the GP. Note *sent*. It doesn't matter if it takes weeks. The
Director of Quality and Standards is not interested in changing the word
*sent* to *received*. So much for PCLP.
--------------------------
Dr David J Plews
email: [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|