Skip to main content

The NHS Emergency Care Plan underestimates the role of general practice

I welcome the Government’s commitment to expanding urgent care provision in community settings. This approach has the potential to ease pressure on emergency departments and enable ambulance services to focus more effectively on patients who require rapid assessment and conveyance.

However, as I discuss in the BMJ, the current Emergency Care Plan underestimates the central role that NHS general practice can and should play. Primary care is often the first point of contact for patients with urgent needs, and with appropriate support, it can manage many conditions effectively without referral to other parts of the system. There is also a risk that investing in a wide array of separate interventions—such as urgent treatment centres, community response teams, and virtual wards—without clear coordination could further fragment care. This may reduce continuity, lead to duplication, and ultimately result in less efficient use of NHS resources.

Direct investment in NHS general practice—particularly at a time when many GPs are underutilised or struggling to find substantive roles—would strengthen clinical capacity where it is most needed. Enhancing the ability of general practice to manage both acute presentations and long-term conditions more effectively would support whole-system resilience and reduce downstream demand across urgent and emergency care.

Comments

Anonymous said…
nice blog

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...

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...

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...