Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
EDITOR-
I was interested to read George Taylor's recent and timely article on
under-performing doctors(1), especially having personally devoted the
last couple of year to addressing the subject. While finding myself
in agreement with many of his findings I was concerned by the lack of
reference to the report published last year by the School of Health
and Related Research (ScHARR) at the University of Sheffield(2). The
report, commissioned by the Department of Health, provides a
framework of practical guidance for health authorities, local medical
committees and GP educationalists on developing local arrangements
for supporting GPs whose performance gives cause for concern.
The report was formally endorsed by the Department of Health in
FHSL(97)39 which commended the guidance to regional offices, health
authorities and local medical committees. In the words of the
circular "the report draws on existing local developments to suggest
a practical management framework for identifying doctors whose
performance is deteriorating, for supporting them and remedying
problems".
It is worrying to note that contributors to Dr Taylor's research,
which was conducted in early 1998, failed to cite a document
commended to them only a few weeks before, particularly as the report
had attracted widespread coverage from the GP media and broad support
from professional bodies such as the GMC, the GMSC and the RCGP.
Guy Rotherham
Senior Research Fellow
ScHARR
Regent Court
30 Regent Street
Sheffield
S1 4DA
Tele: 0114 2220792
1 Taylor G. Underperforming doctors: a postal survey of the
Northern Deanery. BMJ 1998;316:1705-1708
2 Rotherham G, Martin D, Joesbury H, Mathers N. Measures to assist
GPs whose performance gives cause for concern. University of
Sheffield, ScHARR 1997
I was concerned when I read this paper that the survey had been carried out in 1988. This may represent a simple error of detail. If it is true that the survey is over 10 years old I would question it's relevance. Clearly a lot has happened in General Practice since then. With reorganisation of complaints procedures for example and an increasing dissatisfaction expressed by patients about the care they receive from doctors it may have been more relevant to have repeated the study with some allowance for a patient perspective of doctors performance (where this can be substantiated to be unsatisfactory).
Re: Underperforming doctors: a postal survey of the Northern Deanery
EDITOR-
I was interested to read George Taylor's recent and timely article on
under-performing doctors(1), especially having personally devoted the
last couple of year to addressing the subject. While finding myself
in agreement with many of his findings I was concerned by the lack of
reference to the report published last year by the School of Health
and Related Research (ScHARR) at the University of Sheffield(2). The
report, commissioned by the Department of Health, provides a
framework of practical guidance for health authorities, local medical
committees and GP educationalists on developing local arrangements
for supporting GPs whose performance gives cause for concern.
The report was formally endorsed by the Department of Health in
FHSL(97)39 which commended the guidance to regional offices, health
authorities and local medical committees. In the words of the
circular "the report draws on existing local developments to suggest
a practical management framework for identifying doctors whose
performance is deteriorating, for supporting them and remedying
problems".
It is worrying to note that contributors to Dr Taylor's research,
which was conducted in early 1998, failed to cite a document
commended to them only a few weeks before, particularly as the report
had attracted widespread coverage from the GP media and broad support
from professional bodies such as the GMC, the GMSC and the RCGP.
Guy Rotherham
Senior Research Fellow
ScHARR
Regent Court
30 Regent Street
Sheffield
S1 4DA
Tele: 0114 2220792
1 Taylor G. Underperforming doctors: a postal survey of the
Northern Deanery. BMJ 1998;316:1705-1708
2 Rotherham G, Martin D, Joesbury H, Mathers N. Measures to assist
GPs whose performance gives cause for concern. University of
Sheffield, ScHARR 1997
Competing interests: No competing interests