"Appointment process is inefficient"

Access to appointments is by phone call at 8am or 12pm for each day. Advanced bookings within a two week period are also possible. Ringing at 8 or 12 puts you into a queue system. Today I was position 6 and there were 2 appointment times left for that day. There are typically 4 or 5 doctors at any one time, so each has about 4 bookable 10 minute appointments each day. If the appointment time is not suitable (existing appointments, work etc) it is necessary to ring back at 8 or 12 or book an advanced appointment. If that date is not suitable it is necessary to ring back the next day and try again.

This means that the vast majority of appointments are being made in advance leaving only very limited provision for urgent appointments on the day.

So, who does this benefit?

Not the reception staff who everyone is warned in a recorded message not to be rude to when you cannot get an appointment. Many of them sound defensive and stressed which can seem rude and aggressive at times.

Neither do the patients benefit who have to negotiate the system and rely on pot luck. It is incredibly frustrating at times and it’s no wonder that patients are sometimes rude to receptionists.

Also, the whole process is very inefficient and clinically ineffective as there is no process to determine access based on immediate clinical need. Ringing multiple times through the week to finally get an appointment assumes that there is no real clinical need in the first place. Should we assume that doctors believe that much of what they see is actually a complete waste of their time? Therefore, rationing of access makes no difference to the patient?

So, who benefits? Doctors must feel under siege to put up such barriers to access.

The system does not work and needs to be changed.