Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2004;329:1343 (4 December), doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7478.1343
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORMaynard and Bloor show no benefit of financial incentives, rather their limitations, divisions, and distortions, with regard to the consultant contract.1 Most recent changes in health have not been driven by such incentives.
Overall, 85% of consultants have signed up to the new contract. Surveys show that a third are already seeing improvements. Monitoring will indicate where adjustments are needed, but there is no planned revision.
|
The contract gives transparency and ability to manage performance. Trusts that have negotiated job plans, including objectives and supporting resources, in partnership with consultants reflecting the number of programmed activities required will see this to the benefit of patients and consultants. To omit proper job planning misses a fundamental feature of the contract
There is little evidence of support for fee for service payments. Consultants realise the limitations, as shown by the refusal to bow to pressure from the last health secretary.
Jonathan M Fielden, consultant in anaesthesia and intensive care medicine
Royal Berkshire Hospital, Reading RG1 5AN jonathan.fielden@rbbh-tr.nhs.uk