Changes to GP Training in the UK

The 'Squinty Bridge' - Ran across it on Sunday

In the BMA News this week:

 

The Scottish Government has suggested that it might welcome 'something different' and a 'different approach' when it comes to reforming the NHS pensions scheme. The outcome of the ballot on industrial action is still awaited. 

Academic medicine and public health medicine are the careers in the spotlight, with redundancies being made in senior clinical lecture posts in London and the warning that public health trainees face a lack of substantive posts to enter into at the end of their training. It seems that in a tough financial climate, these are the kinds of areas taking the biggest hit.

Today's been the hottest day in Scotland in March since the records began (22.9'C in Aboyne, near Mum and Dad in Banchory!). In Wales, the government is considering offering free sun-tan lotion to under 11 year old children. This is being considered to help protect children from UV radiation, along with other measures such as better provision of shade in schools.

GP training has changed recently to update the existing three year specialty training programme, to a four year programme. Apparently the existing programme is one of the shortest in Europe and has left some trainees feeling 'competent but not confident'. The RCGP plan is to increase the training from three to four years. The cost of each trainee going through an additional year is approximately £63,500 and the extra cost of the whole current cohort of trainees doing an ST4 year is approximately £209 million. However, it is believed that this will help to create doctors who are less likely to refer people to hospital and more likely to rationalise inappropriate prescribing. Apparently a reduction of inappropriate prescribing of just 2 percent could save £164 million a year, whilst a reduction in the total number of in-patient days by just 1% (through less people being referred to hospital) could save £267 million a year. But just how useful will an extra year be? The argument for is that doctors training for longer will be more experienced and competent when they finish. The argument against is that this extra year will simply involve filling gaps in rotas in hospitals where there is no time for learning anyway. The jury's out on this one but there seem to be pretty strong opinions out there for both sides!