A letter

I'm still angry at the government.

But at least one MP understands what I mean: Famous Green Caroline Lucas has sponsored a sympathetic early day motion http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2015-16/539, so I wrote a letter to my MP at www.theyworkforyou.com to bring it to his attention.

                              


                                        Tuesday 20 October 2015

Dear My Local MP,

I have recently moved to constituency to begin work as a junior doctor
at hospital, and so have become one of your constituents. I am writing to
ask for your support in opposing recent changes to doctors' working
conditions and further to express my disappointment in the current
government's handling of the NHS.

I am sure you are well aware of the collective anger felt by doctors at
prospective contract changes. Much opinion and analysis has been
published in the national press, as well as on social media. I expect
many doctors will have written to you before now and you will have no
doubt seen coverage of the large demonstration in London last weekend.

I speak for many of my colleagues in stating that I believe the imposed
changes are damaging for a great number of reasons. The proposed
contract devalues doctors, patients and the NHS. 

The contract fundamentally changes the way doctors get paid, such that
they would expect no increased pay for working evenings or Saturdays.
This  allow rota managers to significantly worsen the working
conditions of all doctors, and will result in a significant pay cut for
doctors already working difficult rotas.

The contract would remove safeguards against doctors working long
hours. Doctors could be coerced into routinely working longer than
their contracted hours, further demoralising and fatiguing those in the
profession.

The reason for this change appears to be to work towards a 7 day health
service. The benefits of a full 7 day (elective, as emergency cover is
already 7 day) NHS has been grossly overstated by the government. Many
people would welcome the huge increase in staff (and funding) required
to achieve a full 7 day service, but unfortunately there has been no
suggestion of this.

Without extra funding and extra staff the alternative solutions would
be either pulling doctors out of their weekday jobs to cover the
weekends - and the NHS is already straining to operate Monday to Friday
- or increasing the working week of doctors by approximately 40% more
hours. Both are directly harmful to doctors and patients. The contract
would also pave the way for other healthcare professionals to be
expected to work at the weekend and/or face (further) pay cuts
themselves so these concerns will be soon also directly felt by nurses,
consultants, porters, radiographers, ward clerks, physiotherapists and
so on, and on, and on.

There is already a large retention and recruitment crisis in the NHS.
Training positions in many specialities remain unfilled and demands of
patient care are only barely met with expensive and less efficient
locum staff. As doctors decide that the working conditions are no
longer tolerable then the working conditions for those remaining get
worse still as they must shoulder the annually increasing burden.
Obviously this situation is already bad for patient care, and the
problem will only be exacerbated as this contract will force many
doctors out of the NHS to better jobs in the UK or abroad.  I am very
concerned that an understaffed NHS will not survive much longer.

It is painful to watch as my profession and the NHS continue to be
undervalued, misunderstood and mismanaged. I do not have confidence in
the Secretary of State for Health's ability to protect the nations
health. I urge the Secretary of State to listen to his workforce and to
engage in meaningful talks. Unfortunately this has not occurred as yet
and many doctors feel forced to take the uneasy decision to vote for
industrial action in the coming ballot. I sincerely hope there can be a
strike-free resolution that allows doctors to feel valued, patients to
receive excellent care and shows investment in the future of the
National Health Service.

I strongly believe that the NHS is worth fighting for and so I would
like to ask your support for Early Day Motion 539: Junior Doctors (tabled
19/10/15), and also to ask what you and the Labour Party will do to protect
doctors, patients and the NHS.
Many thanks for listening to my concerns. I look forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely,

Dr O
MA MBChB 





On the 5th of November I got a fairly supportive copy paste reply, albeit vague and without reference to the Early Day Motion I asked support for.
 (re-copied and pasted here with names removed) 

Dear Dr 

Thank you for your recent email regarding junior doctor contracts.

The Labour Party is currently leading on this issue in the House of Commons. Last week, we secured an opposition day debate on the matter where we called for the Government to drop their plans for a new junior doctor contract. We also put forward new proposals which are fair for staff and safe for patients.

Ultimately, the Labour Party believes that it is wrong for the Government to want to pay some junior doctors less to do the work they do now. Labour is concerned that the removal of safeguards which prevent junior doctors having to work excessively hours may leave them too exhausted to provide safe patient care. Jeremy Hunt should recognise the increasing public concern on this issue, stop his high-handed demands and demonstrate a willingness to compromise and prioritise patient safety.

I can assure you that this issue is a priority of the Labour Party’s. In opposition, we will continue to follow this matter closely to hold the Government to account.

I have also offered to meet with a group of constituents and junior doctors who are concerned about this matter.

Please do not hesitate to contact me again if you feel that I can be of any further assistance with this or any other matter.

Yours sincerely

Nobody likes a complainer

Nobody likes a complainer, so I feel real sympathy for my friends and family who have listened to me moan about my job with astonishing regularity and passion over the past couple of months.

There are dozens of things that irk me about my job, and since it feels like I am at my job most of the time I feel irked most of the time, in dozens of ways.

What is difficult is that despite all of my complaining, most of my friends and family don’t really understand why I am so angry all of the time. So I can only conclude that 1) I am not at all good at articulating my gripes and 2) I am an unusually grumpy and furious sort of person.

There is good evidence for both 1) and 2), but I don’t think we can exclude the third possibility being true at the same time: 3) there are several problems with the job at present that are only acutely apparent to an fy1 in my position. So with that in mind I’ll power on ahead with some more complaining about a particular aspect of my job, mercifully in a highly ignorable way.

A broad category of irritation is prescribing; managing patient’s drug therapy is an important part of the role of junior doctors.

On my most recent night shift I got talking to a pleasant patient who refused to relinquish his usual tablets to the nurses for safekeeping. I was unable to convince him because I privately agreed that this was a pointless thing to do.

A patient in hospital is expected to hand over all of their regular medications to the nursing staff so they can lock them in a safe. A junior doctor is then asked to copy all of the drugs and doses onto a hospital drug card which instructs the nurses when, if and how to give each drug.

A pharmacist then checks that this has been done correctly, and alerts the junior doctor to any mistakes so he or she then can return to correct them. This is common because very junior doctors have only a small fraction of the drug expertise as the pharmacists, but only doctors can prescribe.

Even if a patient previously had complete control over when to take each drug, in hospital it is the nurses that administer the medication. The gentleman I was talking to protested that quite often on his previous admission he was left for long periods of time before being allowed his pain medication as the nurses were unable to attend to him immediately, because they have millions of other things to do.

When the space on the drug card runs out the junior doctor is then asked to copy out the drugs once again onto a fresh drug card. These re-writes would not be necessary if we adopted electronic prescribing.

http://www.polyp.org.uk/index.html

When a patient is well enough to be discharged from hospital the junior doctor must take the dug card to a computer and type them into a specific and ancient piece of user-hostile software in order to produce a printout of the patient’s list of drugs (the same drugs as on the drug card) to give to a pharmacist, who will check the list and dispense the drugs.

A pharmacist then checks that this has been done correctly, and alerts the junior doctor to any mistakes so he or she then can return to correct them. This is common because very junior doctors have only a small fraction of the drug expertise as the pharmacists, but only doctors can prescribe.

This prescribing process is required for every patient in hospital, even when their drugs are exactly the same before, during and after their hospital stay. It creates delays for patients receiving their drugs, requires the input of and communication between at least three different professionals and delays discharge from hospital, further contributing to the already pressing hospital-wide bed shortage.

A patient cannot be discharged until a doctor writes their discharge summary, and their medications are “prescribed” by a doctor. It falls to the junior doctor to write this summary even if they have never before met the patient. The doctor must also prescribe their drugs without expert knowledge of their condition, or management plan, or why they are even on the drugs, so often they are prescribing drugs simply because they were on them before admission. Such time-consuming paperwork never takes priority over more urgent jobs for unwell patients and so very often discharges are delayed, at great cost to the NHS. Some trusts employ “discharge locums”, doctors who are paid simply to ensure all of this paperwork is done and all these boxes are ticked to allow beds to be freed up. This isn’t an entirely satisfying solution but may be a pragmatic solution to the issue in the short term: on the same nightshift I was bleeped repeatedly to do some of these TTOs  (“to take out” medicines) left over from the day before, and I ended up doing the discharges when I had a spare minute away from more urgent tasks- at 8am the next morning.

Let me quickly insert dozens of caveats; I am not questioning any of the following:

I can see that there is value in having a clear record of a patient’s drug therapy before and during a hospital stay.

I can see that there is value in allowing nurses to control medications, especially when there are issues with a patient’s capacity to safely administer them himself. I can see that it might be important to store controlled drugs away securely to prevent them getting into the wrong hands.

I can see that experience in prescribing is an essential part of the training of doctors.

I can see that having a clear summary of what happened in hospital is important, and I can see why having an up-to-date list of medications and any changes is important for record keeping and to inform future management decisions.

But I am questioning all of the following:

I am questioning whether it is appropriate for a junior doctor (on-call or otherwise) to complete discharge paperwork for patients they’ve never met.

I am questioning whether it is a good use of resources to mandate that nurses dispense routine medications to competent patients.

I am questioning why it is necessary for the doctor to perform tasks that are then repeated and improved by a pharmacist.

I am questioning whether it is safe for junior doctors to write discharge summaries without clear instructions from senior doctors regarding future management or follow up.

I am questioning whether it is reasonable to expect discharge summaries to be completed between 2pm (end of ward round) and 5pm (closure of pharmacies) when there are a multitude of more important things to be done.

I am questioning the sense of using a paper based prescription system that is simply translated to an electronic one (via hideous software) upon discharge.

Of course, none of these problems would be quite so irksome had we either sufficient time or staff to perform the tasks to a satisfactory level without feeling rushed.