Is it just me who is puzzled?

I couldn't agree more. Before I retired from NHS I used to 'cost' meetings in my head. I'd add up the hours used at the pay point people were at on the pay scales. Such a huge consumer of clinical time.

Aveline

I couldn't agree more. Before I retired from NHS I used to 'cost' meetings in my head. I'd add up the hours used at the pay point people were at on the pay scales. Such a huge consumer of clinical time.

That is funny Aveline . I used to do the exact same thing at my meetings I was forced to attend. Mainly because they were incredibly boring, useless, and I liked mathematics.

Well, in this case it depends on what the meetings were for, have we got actual information?

I can imagine for example forward planning meetings where its very desirable that clinicians be involved tho not utterly essential and so on.

My sister was a PA for the NHS. It was her job to set up/organise meetings. She said the ridiculous things they had meetings about and the cost, including buffets would make your hair curl.

A lot (not all) of the meetings are desirable. There is a bit of a meetings culture, but in the last few years at least 50% of mine scheduled got cancelled due to one participant being too busy & everyone jumping on the bandwagon & agreeing to postpone, because everyone was too busy & very few prioritised meetings over their day to day role.

The meetings I was talking about were not clinical ie not about patients but procedures/admin activities. 🥱

When I worked for a nationalised industry we had a long running joke about meetings to talk about the meetings.

There certainly was a lot of meetings to plan meetings

A proportion of the meetings are about getting the correct money for procedures that have been done, or for new procedures that will be done: that does impact patients because ensuring you're getting the correct money for what you've done is a very time-effective way of ensuring the money's going to be there to offer the treatments to the next raft of patients coming along.

Where I worked all meetings involving clinicians took place on the same day of each week, in designated administration sessions. Clinical sessions weren’t cancelled so meetings could be attended. I would assume that must have been happening in the Lancaster Infirmary, as otherwise not attending meetings wouldn’t affect their productivity as clinicians.

Wes Streeting wants hospitals and trusts that are struggling to improve, aren't doctors (maybe managers) from hospitals that are doing well to advise and guide them so they can improve? Surely they will have to have meetings to work out what is going well and what isn't. At this time of year it is probably very difficult to cope with demand but I'm sure they will still get criticised if they don't manage to improve which presumably should magically happen.

Good clinical governance staff can be very valuable. Non clinical but can really lead to streamlined and good quality working systems. I appreciated our clinical governance staff and they really improved our service.

It was on the Lancaster Hospital’s things to do list.
Cancellation of non-essential meetings/activities in order to redirect clinician time to patient facing activities.

^W3 Well, in this case it depends on what the meetings were for, have we got actual information?

So sorry W3.
I simply copied and pasted the article from the hospital.
They didn’t specify what the non-essential meetings/activities were for.
If they think they aren’t essential I am not in a position to argue with that.

Cancellation of non-essential meetings/activities in order to redirect clinician time to patient facing activities.

Were these non-essential meetings set up by managers and clinicians were requested to attend but perhaps the clinicians have politely declined so that they can get on with their real work?

It could be any meetings or activities which impinge on their designated clinical sessions. For example, Education and supervision meetings, seeing reps, meetings about clinical trials, interviews, meetings with other specialties to discuss new treatment pathways and access, cross Divisional meetings for patients with multiple diagnoses, internal Directorate meetings. Meetings organised by Management would be much less frequent than the activities controlled by the clinicians themselves. All consultants do have designated admin sessions built into the weekly timetable, it’s when these activities take place when they should be seeing patients rather than in their admin sessions that the impact is on waiting lists/times.

It could be any of those mentioned by Allira or Casdon and others. I don’t suppose we will hear, which leaves us free to guess or hypothesise.
If it really does mean more opportunity of face to face time with a doctor then it seems like a good idea.

I found an article about this. My impression was that cancelling meetings was a temporary solution to a crisis. A & E was under severe pressure and just couldn't cope. It seemed to me, from reading the article, that it was a question of 'all hands to the deck'.

Some meetings are essential for forward planning (eg. how to improve systems, staffing needs, budget savings, etc etc) but it's a question of prioritising. Long-term planning meetings are essential, but not when there are hundreds of potentially very sick people in A & E.

I didn't have the impression that cancelling meetings was to be permanent, so would be unlikely to result in more ftf consultations, apart from in A & E on a short term basis.

Some meetings are essential. It didn’t say those meetings would be cancelled, just the non-essential ones.

Mollygo

Some meetings are essential. It didn’t say those meetings would be cancelled, just the non-essential ones.

I know. I read the article.

My point is that some meetings are essential, but it's a question of priorities. If there are hundreds of people waiting for treatment now, the priority is to treat those people not discuss how A & E could be made more efficient in the future. Nevertheless, meetings about efficiency are essential and will need to take place at some time. Without coherent meetings to discuss long-term planning, everything ends up being short-term with everybody on the back foot all the time. Sadly, that happens too often, which is why there is so much short-termism.

growstuff

Mollygo

Some meetings are essential. It didn’t say those meetings would be cancelled, just the non-essential ones.

I know. I read the article.

My point is that some meetings are essential, but it's a question of priorities. If there are hundreds of people waiting for treatment now, the priority is to treat those people not discuss how A & E could be made more efficient in the future. Nevertheless, meetings about efficiency are essential and will need to take place at some time. Without coherent meetings to discuss long-term planning, everything ends up being short-term with everybody on the back foot all the time. Sadly, that happens too often, which is why there is so much short-termism.

Those forward long term planning meetings are actually essential to best use clinical time and resources and flag up potential issues to be resolved. they may not be essential that week, but without them best practice won't take place.

There has to be liaison and best planning with that mixture of clinical and admin/resource managing.

Not sure why you’re pressing this, but whatever.

Mollygo

Not sure why you’re pressing this, but whatever.

It's your OP. Didn't you want anybody to reply?

It doesn't seem at all puzzling to some of us.

I once worked for a place where all routine meetings were held standing up and no tea 'n bickies. Didn't half cut down on the time expended listening to folk who only attend to hear themselves talk!