On Wed, 10 Jun 1998 18:27:48 +0100
"Andrew Herd" <[log in to unmask]> wrote
:
<SNIP>> Bad for our prescribing budget.
anh> > Good for our take home pay.
anh> > Comments?
anh> > Gwen
anh> Seems to be a sound assessment to me.
Surely not. Is this not another case of how the profession has scored an
own goal
? For years, Medeconomics etc have run articles about *"Maximising* your
flu jab income". Now nearly everyone does it, we are all financially
penalised if we do *not* run hell-for-leather and vaccinate every elder
and diabetic and asthmatic on the list. If we include younger bods,^^
then in a few years we will have vastly increased our workload for *no*
remuneration as the 'pool' system means we only get what the Review Body
suggests and the govt. phases in. No-one believes that workload
increases and pays accordingly.
^^ and then Medeconomics can run articles by the 'financially astute'
telling us how we can maximise our income by doing flu jabs with the
6-week check,MMR and MMR2 kiddies!
Graham
I used to be apathetic...now, I just don't care.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|