Skip to main content

Is it time to rethink the independent contractor status of GPs

Is it time to rethink the independent contractor status of GPs in areas of the UK where general practice is struggling? Mixing funding for patient services with funding for GP remuneration can lead to government reluctance to invest more in primary care for fear that money intended for service improvement will end up boosting GPs’ incomes. As practices close, it becomes clear that an individual practice is often too small a unit to carry the risk of unpredictable financial burdens such as maternity or sick leave. Ultimately, patients suffer, particularly in inner city or rural practices that receive little financial allowance for deprivation within current funding arrangements, and it is unlikely that a new “fairer funding formula” will rectify this.

The knock-on effects of the funding shortfall in these struggling practices are seen in the difficulties they have in recruiting GPs. Young doctors want clear job plans, career progression, time for management and clinical leadership, and guaranteed employment rights. These aspirations can be made real only by developing NHS primary care provider organisations that employ GPs and practice staff on mandatory NHS contracts. We need to act before NHS general practice becomes non-viable as it risks doing so in many parts of the UK. Placing GPs and their primary care teams on NHS contracts won't be a cheap option but it may be needed to 'rescue' general practice in the parts of the country where it is currently struggling to meet patient needs and expectations.

A version of this blog was first published in the BMJ.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between primordial prevention and primary prevention?

Primordial prevention and primary prevention are both crucial strategies for promoting health, but they operate at different levels. Primordial prevention aims to address the root causes of health problems and improve the wider determinants of health. It focuses on preventing the emergence of risk factors in the first place by tackling the underlying social, economic, and environmental determinants of health. This involves broad, population-wide interventions such as: Policies that promote healthy food choices: Think about initiatives like taxing sugary drinks to discourage unhealthy consumption, or providing subsidies for fruits and vegetables to make them more accessible. Urban planning that prioritises well-being: This could include creating walkable neighborhoods with safe cycling routes, ensuring access to green spaces for recreation and relaxation, and designing communities that foster social connections. Social programs that address inequality: Initiatives aimed at reducing pov...
Post a Comment
Read more

What makes a good doctor – and who gets to decide?

What Makes a Good Doctor? This is the question that Waseem Jerjes and I explore in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine . It is a key question that underpins the architecture of medical education, clinical practice, regulation, and professional identity. It cannot be answered by regulators, educators, or employers in isolation. It must be answered together – by doctors and patients – revisited throughout a career, and adapted as society and the profession change. Without that shared reflection, the danger is not simply disillusionment, but the erosion of the moral foundations of clinical work. As we enter an era when diagnosis will increasingly involve artificial intelligence and when performance metrics reward volume over value, reclaiming this question as a professional one is imperative. The integrity of our institutions – and of the practitioners within them – depends on reimagining excellence in inclusive, relational terms. A good doctor is not a flawless technician or a f...
Post a Comment
Read more

Relevance Over Recall: Rethinking How AI Uses Clinical Data

Our article in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine argues that safe and effective AI in healthcare must incorporate mechanisms that emulate human judgement - down-weighting old, inaccurate or superseded information and prioritising what is recent, clinically relevant and reaffirmed - so that AI supports, rather than disrupts, high-quality patient care.  Clinicians constantly revise, reinterpret and filter past information so that only what is relevant, accurate and timely shapes present-day management decisions; medical records function as dynamic “working tools” rather than fixed archives. By contrast, many AI systems lack this capacity for selective forgetting and often treat all historical data as equally meaningful.  This can lead to outdated or low-confidence diagnoses being repeatedly resurfaced, persistent labels influencing clinical expectations, and irrelevant, long-resolved events cluttering summaries and decision-support outputs. Such indiscriminate recall...
Post a Comment
Read more