NHS Choices introduces GP rating

.........................................................

Curiously, about a week after I posted on the limitations of the GP choice element of NHS Choices, the services has been upgraded. Today users were met with the following box:

GPratebox

This is clearly a step forward in that it allows a basic, albeit subjective, assessment of quality for patients. It remains to be seen whether the uptake of ratings will be as successful as they have been for hospitals. Bear in mind that there are roughly 10158 GP surgeries in the UK, clearly a large number of reviews are needed for it to be a viable resource.

Coupled with this, the presentation of search results for GPs has taken a step forward. As the next image demonstrates:

GPsearchbetter

The new layout of search results for GPs brings NHS choices much more in line with its Hospital search. It is notable that NHS choices is now pushing the choices that people can make regarding the type of GP they want to use. The tick boxes at the top allows for a number of options geared towards choice of GP including available clinics and surgery accessibility requirements, as well as opening times. Further the initial dialogue in each returned search result offers more, by way of number and sex of doctors, languages spoken, and the potential for patient reviews. The other import from the hospitals search functionality is the ability to shortlist and compare services.

What hasn’t changed however are the methods of ordering GPs, this is still fundamentally a distance based list, although it is now more modifiable. The only other option is to list GPs alphabetically, because you might want to use a GP whose name is higher in the alphabet?! Coupled with this, there are still overtones of locality and community in the way services are distributed, as well as references to defacto catchment areas. Getting more information is also tricky, I decided to learn more about the “number of GPs” from the link on the right hand side and was confronted with the following information:

NumberofGPsfact

This does not actually tell me anything that I didn’t already know from the presence of the fact itself. In fact it seems markedly rushed and incomplete. Unfortunately, it would seem that beyond this new shiny facade, much of the information hasn’t changed. I still can’t find out anything new when I drill down, it is simply that the frontend has been improved. The sections that hint at GP quality are still absent or not very useful, and there are links to the NHS Information Centre for Quality and Outcomes Framework (QoF) data which is at best confusing and intimidating.

Nevertheless, I may revisit the patient reviews as a data source in the future and investigate how good a source of data they may be. They may add value to a mash-up of primary care services, or contribute to a discussion of neo-geography.

~ End Article and Begin Conversation ~

~ Now It's Your Turn ~

Feel free to use <strong>, <em>, and <a href="">

[]

The Blogroll

Search this Site


[]