-
26-11-2007, 06:39 AM #31
Impressive.
-
26-11-2007, 09:47 AM #32Junior Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
- Posts
- 5
The Treasury report cites an average salary for GP's in the UK in 2003-4 of £82 000. The latest figures, for 2004-5, show that the average income of GP's, net of expenses, was £106 000, a rise of 30% in one year. For dispensing GP's the figure is even higher: they earned an average of £128 000 after expenses, a 31% rise.
-
26-11-2007, 02:25 PM #33Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Posts
- 417
GP is a business. So the GPs who are earning the bucks are usually employing other GPs on standard salaries. If things go according to the govenment's plan and we have Tesco's running GPs then they will simply take the money. It is not going to be any cheaper.
Ignore List
Gizmo says -
"Lowering entry requirements therefore runs the short term risk of increased numbers of students dropping out of medical school, or the longer term risk of less well qualified medical entrants becoming less competent doctors."
Prof McManus - Prof of Medical Education
-
28-11-2007, 08:41 PM #34
sreeja, did yo uread those figures or were you told?
You need to also state that in the same year pension contributions for themselves and staff were shifted from the PCT to the GP's. This effectivley wiped out any increase in the salary.
You need all the facts before taking any DoH info to heart.FY1 chest medicine
-
29-11-2007, 05:15 PM #35Junior Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
- Posts
- 1
These are some very interesting replies.
From what I can tell is that there are alot of gp's who are using the contracts to work less and make just as much money. Providing that other doctors within the practice work hard to take up the backlog. Certainly some gp's who have contracts with pcts are taking tremendous advantage and doing such inadequate jobs that many non medics feel its cheaper to hire a nurse who can do an equally bad or better job then the lazy. Although because they are non medical they do not have a good grasp of clinical governence issues.
Certainly there are many gps who care about their patients and work very hard to earn good money. I do believe that we need tighter more realistic regulations on doctors who may using the system to their advantage thus making it harder for hard working collegues.
-
30-11-2007, 05:15 PM #36
Well Manus I think you need to have another look.
Most of the wage announcements have been after the GMS contract was introduced.
Since then there has been a small of zero pay increase to GP's though expenditure has increased.
As for being impressed by nurses working to protocols...not really. The most impressive nyrses i have met have been the ones who work in outreach teams of for example the pain team. Not working to specific protocols but from a good knowledge base on a specific subject.
Doctors are pants at following protocols? When the protocol is good they get used otherwise extensive knowledge can be used in place of a "clinical decision pathways".
Drugs are a good example, when they have no evidence they don't go on protocols. I see lots of them used effectively anyway, bugger protocols.
As for not labeling people then how the hell do you know what skills they have? Instead of sending a patient to the physio you send them to anyone and hope they know how to do mobility exercises?
I was very impressed with my GP practice a couple of years ago...good GP's keeping up skills and using extensive clinical knowledge rather than blindly following protocols.FY1 chest medicine
-
01-12-2007, 08:16 PM #37Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Posts
- 417
Hi Manus,
From my experience in hospital medicine the problems with nurses using protocols is that they cannot see when to deviate from them, and yes there are instances where they have to be deviated from. An example would be a nurse telling me I could not admit a man who was in retention, because his residual had been about 1450mls and the protocol stated admission should only be above 1500mls. It didn't matter what any of the other factors where to her!!! As long as one can appreciate the times where they may not be applicable, then I think protocols are great things, and give good guidance to nurses and doctors alike.Ignore List
Gizmo says -
"Lowering entry requirements therefore runs the short term risk of increased numbers of students dropping out of medical school, or the longer term risk of less well qualified medical entrants becoming less competent doctors."
Prof McManus - Prof of Medical Education
-
04-12-2007, 06:23 AM #38
Manus its late so i will try to remember to post a longer reply another time.
I disagree in a big way, often protocols are written by non-experts and have some bloody stupid things on them...I was told by an A&E consultant that we no longer use high flow oxygen in acute asthma attacks...why becaus the protocol says so. Apparently there is no "evidence" for it's use so it is not on there. He did give me a wry smile when i asked what he would do...
If you use protocols to aid your usual working then great...if you work to protocols only then you probably shouldn't be doing the job.FY1 chest medicine
-
08-09-2009, 12:01 AM #39
On the topic of private practice, how do you actually get into doing private healthcare?
-
10-09-2009, 12:35 PM #40
Depends on a number of factors; how often they work in private practice, their speciality, whether or not they do ops, how much they charge for a consultation etc.
We have one orthopaedic surgeon here who is a specialist spinal surgeon and he will see patients for 12 hours with just a lunch break - over £100 for each new patient he sees and a bit less for f/ups. Unreal.
Then there's a urologist here who told me he only gets about £50 for doing a vasectomy.Do what makes you happy and all else will follow


LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks




Reply With Quote

Bookmarks