My GP has told me that 80% of their appointments don't need a GP appointment.

[Hiptothisjive]

So I get that there are always people that need reassurance but this number shocked me. Basically a lot of people are visiting their GP for reasons they don't need to and taking up a lot of GP time.

It's great some of the prescriptions that can be given via a pharmacy now, but surely there needs to be a re-addressing of when to visit a doctor?

YABU - to expect people to know better than go to their GP when they don't need to
YANBU - people should go to the doctor whenever they want to no matter what the issue

There’s only one other one in my catchment and they have a sign up saying they will not accept patients that are wanting to change from the other surgery

Yes, it varies. Rural patients may have virtually no choice at all. And some areas are real blackspots, where some practises are not taking on patients at all.

You live in London. Nothing further need be said.

London is not one homogeneous lump with the same amount of GPs and population density in every area...

No, but there is still a far higher likelihood of alternative practices within a reasonable distance than in somewhere like rural west Dorset.
(See also: schools.)

Oh poor London. So few options available. Just like a semi rural or rural area in the North.

Give me a break.

There's no need to be rude.

I'm sorry but I get sick of it being all about London and a total failure to recognise the problems that the other 75% of the population have.

Its like when its International Women's Day and you get someone going 'but what about the men?'

'But what about London?' as a reprise tends to wind up people who do not have access to the same things.

Its not all about bloody London.

London has 15.5% of England's population, so 84.5% of people in England don't live there.

Wouldn't it be lovely if the rest of the country had the facilities it has!

https://www.rcgp.org.uk/News/research-statement-conference-2024

In fact, parts of London may have access issues:

'GPs in deprived areas are now responsible for caring for a staggering 2,450 patients per head – over 300 more patients per GP than in more affluent areas of the country.
New research published today by the Royal College of GPs ahead of its annual conference in Liverpool reveals that the number of patients per fully qualified, full time GP working in areas with the highest level of income deprivation has increased by an average of 260 in the past six years – a rise of 12% and nearly twice the rate of those in the least deprived areas.
The RCGP analysis found significant variation in the number of patients per GP across the regions in England, with London having the greatest number of registered patients per fully qualified GP at 2,560, whereas the South West has the lowest at 2,020'
...
'Professor Hawthorne will say: “Our latest research reveals that GP practices with the highest levels of income deprivation have far greater numbers of patients to care for than in most affluent areas. More worrying, where the need is greatest, we have uncovered evidence of how much worse that GP to patient ratio has become.
“When I became a GP, it was normal to have a list size between 1,600-1,800 patients. The role was busy and challenging, but it was manageable. Our latest figures reveal that the average is now 2,300.
"All GPs work extremely hard, and we would argue that almost all areas are under-doctored, but it can’t be right that a GP in Kingston upon Thames looks after 1,800 patients while a GP in Kingston upon Hull, one of the most deprived places in England, is expected to cover twice that number.'

The whole thing is a mess for that kind of reason. The World has changed yet the NHS is still stuck in the dark ages with antiquated rules and procedures.

Another ridiculous rule with physical pharmacies is that the counter staff aren't allowed to hand over a prescription if the actual pharmacist isn't present on site, even if they've been "signed off" by the pharmacist. In reality, the counter staff don't check with the pharmacist every time they hand over a prescription and the pharmacist isn't stood there watching the handover, so I fail to see any logic at all why having the pharmacist on the premises makes one iota of difference.

After all, the pharmacist isn't present at "handover" if the prescription is being delivered by the pharmacy van & man, nor present when the post man hands over the parcel for an online pharmacy delivery.

It's things like that which are dragging down the NHS.

But even the "worst" areas of London in terms of access to services etc is probably far better than out in the regions where the majority of the population live. I'm utterly fed up of the London-Centric nature of this country - where a MINORITY of people live but who benefit massively more than the majority of people who live elsewhere.

According to the link I posted, the key factor for access is more about deprivation than location, and London has some of the worst access.

'The RCGP analysis found significant variation in the number of patients per GP across the regions in England, with London having the greatest number of registered patients per fully qualified GP at 2,560, whereas the South West has the lowest at 2,020'

That's registered patients, not patients actually needing medical care. There may be fewer patients per GP in deprived/run down areas, but poverty etc means they're more likely to need more medical attention, more GP appointments, etc. Whereas a lot of the London population will be healthy, richer, relatively younger people who may not need to go near their GP anywhere near so often.

Yes, my late DH was shamed as a timewaster for years and they refused to do even the most basic tests. The GP wrote letters saying he was a drug seeker trying to get benefits.

By the time they finally listened to him it was too late to do the spinal cord surgery he needed, he became quadriplegic and was dead by 40.

But at least he didn't take up any more time of the NHS.

I'm so sorry to hear this.

My ovarian cancer was only caught early because I knew something was very wrong, and I became a complete pain in the arse until one doctor, who'd just happened to have been to an ovarian cancer awareness conference the week before, cottoned on that some of what I was describing were things associated with ovarian cancer. However by that point I was "known" at the surgery, the receptionists facial expressions would visibly change when I entered, and I had a shouting match with a nurse practitioner who did urine tests and told me there was nothing wrong with me.

I'm obstinate and wouldn't back down.

Unlike a dear friend who was fobbed off with "it's probably gastro" by her doctor for TWO years, then died of stage 4 ovarian cancer. She was such a kind, lovely person, who accepted what medical practitioners told her because they knew better than she did.

I hate the fact that the only reason I didn't end up like her is because I dug my heels in and stubbornly refused to accept what I was told. It shouldn't be like that.

It was the same when I was advocating for my mum when she had dementia. But that's another story, one which left me hating the whole NHS.

Anyway, as has been pointed out, overall doctors feel fewer than 16% of consultations are unnecessary, so if any doctor imagines it to be 80% or anywhere near that they are the problem not their patients.

Its a difficult type of problem though. I don't deny London has issues...

Of course it varies by areas. If there is one surgery that covers your village then who do you change to?

Like others with a chronic condition I'm told by my consultant that if I have new symptoms I should go to my GP....because my diagnosis doesn't make me immune to cancer etc. and so it needs checked out.

I've never had trouble getting a GP appointment, and I always get a face to face one, and this seems so unusual nowadays that I'm starting to think there is something in my notes that says I must be seen face to face because I'm high risk of something (I was early vaccinated during COVID so I'm definitely on some list..) 🤔

Perhaps this is why they seem so pissed off at me for asking them to check out a symptom that is unrelated to my diagnosis and potentially serious e.g. chest pain?

Because if it turns out not to be a heart issue, they think I wasted that face to face appointment, that I didn't ask for, and was given because it's their policy, but that's my fault somehow and I'm a time waster?

Or I shouldn't see a GP for chest pain because anyone 50+ with a diagnosis of an autoimmune disease can't also have cardiac issues?

I'm so confused 🤷

That doesn't really stand though, especially if like most ppl with multiple prescriptions you have a pre payment certificate. My ADHD meds cost the same regardless of it being 28 day supply.. I pay around £11 a month that covers all my prescriptions.

I mean I do get what you're saying, my partner only has 1 item on his prescription so doesn't work out cheaper to do the PPC though does get more than 28 days at a time as his aren't controlled medications.

Not just rural/villages, either. In our closest town, about 50,000 people, there's a single GP practice - yes, they have 4/5 surgeries dotted out around the town, but it's just ONE practice, so if you don't like the way they operate, then tough, there's no one and nothing else. There used to be separate practices, but one practice bought out all the others in the noughties. Impossible to see the same GP twice and all the GPs rotate around the different surgeries, you can't even choose to go to your nearest surgery, you have to take what they offer you which means you often have to drive past the one closest to go to the one furthest away. It's a classic example of how the system works for the profit making partners rather than the patients.

After 10 days of a horrible bug I couldn’t shake off, I finally saw the GP (at the urging of a worried dd) but I just knew he’d say ‘It’s probably a virus’ - and he did.
That same night I was blue-lighted to hospital for 3 weeks with pneumonia, ABs for 5 weeks. To be fair, though, the pneumonia had only hit me like an express train that same night.

Like what happened to my MIL. We'd taken her to the GP a couple of times during the month re her ever worsening cough but the GP claimed to have listened to her chest and fobbed her off saying it was clear and told us to get her some cough medicine and cough sweets! We then took her again a third time as she was really struggling to breath and yet another GP just said the same. The day after she collapsed and was blue lighted to A&E with double pneumonia and died 3 days later. There was absolutely no way her chest was clear the day before, nor the week before - even the A&E consultant said the same! GP's are just fob off merchants.

I live in an urban area which isn't London and I can't swap because I am not in catchment for any other practice. I am sure that London practices can work out their catchments so they are very limited too.