Yes you’ve explained you are totally ignorant on the subjectIt’s been explained.
If you don’t agree “shock” I can’t change that.
“Shock” you are repeating your ignorance.

Yes you’ve explained you are totally ignorant on the subjectIt’s been explained.
If you don’t agree “shock” I can’t change that.
Heres a trial where hospital appointments were reduced by 15% because cases where a hospital appointment wasn't needed were filtered out. The Hospital consultants were able to manage three times as many consultations because the GP could effectively provide the background information.
![]()
Here's a separate study where they reduced new appointments by 16%.
The NHS bean counters have checked and it is a big saving.
Thanks, very useful links I’m just reading through them now.Heres a trial where hospital appointments were reduced by 15% because cases where a hospital appointment wasn't needed were filtered out. The Hospital consultants were able to manage three times as many consultations because the GP could effectively provide the background information.
![]()
Here's a separate study where they reduced new appointments by 16%.
The NHS bean counters have checked and it is a big saving.
So where's the scam? How is cutting waiting times by using modern joined up care a trick?
This should reduce the load on hospitals, improving waiting times and get faster care through the system by getting GPS prescribing required blood tests before the first hospital appointment or going to the right team.
How is this a bad idea?
The team estimates that up to three A&G requests can be completed in the time required to see a new patient in clinic. Essentially this means that as long as half of A&G requests are either providing the GP with advice, or sending a patient STT, it ensures that the service is maximising efficiency against the traditional approach of seeing all patients in clinic.
The A&G call (on average) needs to make a difference in some way to be worth doing.From your link. I can't get my head round what these figures mean!
The bit you highlighted is rather hard to make sense of.From your link. I can't get my head round what these figures mean!
From what I have read in the past, other healthcare systems across Europe, like Germany have a more flexible referral system compared to ours.The A&G call (on average) needs to make a difference in some way to be worth doing.
If they can reduce the number of appointments needed or speed care by getting tests ordered so they've got the results for the first appointment, or help avoid unnecessary hospital referrals then it saves money.
Some A&G calls won't make a difference to the treatment outcome at all, and that's fine as long as half of them do make some difference. If it's less than half then they're not saving money or working more efficiently.

Reducing waiting times, more convenience for patients, saving money, increasing efficiency meaning better use of hospital facilities and staff.So where's the scam?
See the word ‘infrequent’
- Concerns about rejection of referrals:
While "rejections" are infrequent, there are concerns that A&G might be used to decline necessary referrals.
It’s impossible to win a rational argument with somebody that doesn’t care about logic.Reducing waiting times, more convenience for patients, saving money, increasing efficiency meaning better use of hospital facilities and staff.
Can't you see the scam, it's right in front of you...
I see gas112 still has no response to facts.You are completely wrong, but I am interested to know how you reached your belief..............So why do you think an A&G request is simply moving a cursor from one box to another?
Perhaps we should look to see what healthcare professionals think about it................here is a practice manager:
Preparing and submitting a detailed A&G request, reviewing specialist advice, adjusting care plans, and handling associated administration requires considerable effort. I’ve read that the minimum costing for any hospital outpatient appointment starts at £150, which makes the £20 A&G payment somewhat underwhelming. The initial feedback from the GPs here is that it’s laughable, especially given that the BMA has advised practices to stop engaging with A&G pathways as part of its collective action.”
the BMA had this on their collective action list:
"Stop engaging with the e-Referral Advice & Guidance pathway – unless it is a timely and clinically helpful process for you in your professional role."
Why?
A = Dr Katie Bramall-Stainer said the advice to stop A&G as part of collective action was added to the BMA ‘menu’ because it is ‘unresourced workload transfer’. It can ‘lead to lengthy back and forth discussions with further requests for GP actions’.
![]()
Practice Managers respond to plans to fund A&G services
Earlier this week, the Government laid out its new ‘elective reform plan’, which aims to cut the list of patients waiting more than 18 weeks for NHS treatment in England. One of the measures that has sparked significant debate amongst Practice Managers is the plan to give doctors £20 each time...practiceindex.co.uk
![]()
BMA may stand down A&G collective action if GPs 'paid fairly'
The BMA's advice for GPs to stop advice and guidance (A&G) may be 'dropped' from collective action options following news of a £20 payment.www.pulsetoday.co.uk
![]()
NHS England » Collective action by GPs: supporting guidance
NHS England » Collective action by GPs: supporting guidancewww.england.nhs.uk
And your point is ?See the word ‘infrequent’
Have a think
I see gas112 still has no response to facts.
gas112 repeatedly claimed A&G is “touch of a button” I’ve provided evidence from actual,GPS and Practice managers showing otherwise……and gas112 has avoided responding.
i see notch is incapable of reading and not read the reply pages ago perhaps matron was changing your nappy at the time or you were busy buying more premium bonds.I see gas112 still has no response to facts.
gas112 repeatedly claimed A&G is “touch of a button” I’ve provided evidence from actual,GPS and Practice managers showing otherwise……and gas112 has avoided responding.