@RoshanaMN Writing a letter is just the tip of the admin iceberg associated with an appointment. We are now our own secretaries - enter diagnosis and encounter details, fill out TCI form, arrange follow up appointments, address letters to the appropriate people/departments. This adds time.
@DrHuw If the starting wait is, say, 300 days, then this '3x faster fall in waiting times' (1.4% reduction vs 4.2% reduction) looks like 295 days vs 287 days. I wonder what that amounts to in £crackteam per days saved.
@valhumphreys51 I triage referrals for GSTT pain clinic. 99.99% of the rejections are because of inadequate information. We have clinics for pelvic, facial, spinal, urological, vascular pain etc- where do we put the ‘please see this patient with chronic pain’?
@camtudor If my pain intensity is lower, I will be able to do more rather than: if my level of function is better, my pain will be less. I think that’s how people think about it but maybe I’m wrong
@camtudor I would probably contest that. Pain intensity (and not the functional impairment associated with pain) is reliably the No.1 priority for patients in just about every study that I have read. Maybe with chronicity that balance shifts a bit
@parthaskar@iDrSunny@ExplosiveEnema2 This is scandalous. A clear, blatant and ocean going attempt to influence the outcome of an independent review.
This is the sort of thing that should make @BBCPanorama salivate.
@DrLKVaughan Interesting that it started with the term Physician’s Assistant’ (assistant to the physician) and somewhere along the line became ‘Physician Assistant’ (a physician who assists)
That one little apostrophe - where did it go?
@cjsnowdon The review does not include international evidence for good reason: Indirectness.
Indirectness (apples and oranges) absolutely poisons a systematic review.