*MEGATHREAD* - The Official 2014 Medicine Interview Preparation Thread
Scroll to see replies
Another question!
If you had £5m, would you decide to fund 1000 hip replacements or fund 100 cancer-curing treatments?
Explain in detail
If you had £5m, would you decide to fund 1000 hip replacements or fund 100 cancer-curing treatments?
Explain in detail
Original post by FlavaFavourFruit
Although I see benefits for GP surgeries opening 12 hours a day, 7 days a week allowing more patients to be seen thus relieving the pressure on A&E departments, I don't think it's practical. It won't be a quick fix.
If this is going to work, I suggest replacing GP surgeries with large drop in centres where there are more doctors and nurses who will be able to see more patients in a day.
Also, if you increase GP hours, you can't expect the same number of GPs to work 7 days a week, that's ridiculous and they have family too. There needs to be more recruitment of doctors (perhaps abroad as it's quicker than training docs in uk which takes a lot of time) plus locum docs are expensive
However docs from abroad have to have a good understanding of english and good training as well as know our uk ethics as GPs are usually first point of contact.
Also, from my work experience shadowing a GP, some GPs arrive way before 9AM and don't leave until 6-7PM, plus some GPs work out of hours and do home visits too
I fear if GP surgeries open 24/7, some GPs might get ill due to overload of stress and they may emigrate.
I have no idea how you would fund it tbh, i guess cuts from another service?
If this is going to work, I suggest replacing GP surgeries with large drop in centres where there are more doctors and nurses who will be able to see more patients in a day.
Also, if you increase GP hours, you can't expect the same number of GPs to work 7 days a week, that's ridiculous and they have family too. There needs to be more recruitment of doctors (perhaps abroad as it's quicker than training docs in uk which takes a lot of time) plus locum docs are expensive
However docs from abroad have to have a good understanding of english and good training as well as know our uk ethics as GPs are usually first point of contact.
Also, from my work experience shadowing a GP, some GPs arrive way before 9AM and don't leave until 6-7PM, plus some GPs work out of hours and do home visits too
I fear if GP surgeries open 24/7, some GPs might get ill due to overload of stress and they may emigrate.
I have no idea how you would fund it tbh, i guess cuts from another service?
Not a bad answer and certainly some good ideas. I'm personally not sure that it will reduce the pressure on A&E departments to any significant degree but I don't have any numbers to back it up.
Large walk-in centres do seem to be popular with the government but they bring their own problems like not being able to book advance appointments for follow-ups, or not being able to see the same doctor each time (this annoys doctors as much as it does patients!)
You are certainly right that it will cost a LOT of money, and may need extra recruitment, perhaps even from overseas. This brings with it its own problems though, such as language barriers as you've described. I wonder personally if language might be even more important in GPland, where so much of their work is done by communication, than in hospital where we can rely on fancy tests etc. They also need to make GP a sufficiently attractive option for UK graduates so that enough of them choose it, and I don't think that the current moves are going to achieve that.
As for making cuts elsewhere - where from? There are no services in the UK that I can think of which are over-funded at present...
Original post by FlavaFavourFruit
Another question!
If you had £5m, would you decide to fund 1000 hip replacements or fund 100 cancer-curing treatments?
Explain in detail
If you had £5m, would you decide to fund 1000 hip replacements or fund 100 cancer-curing treatments?
Explain in detail
High-interest account not an option? Rather be rich
Original post by TattyBoJangles
High-interest account not an option? Rather be rich
In an ideal situation, it would
^^ Thanks Helenia.
Original post by Helenia
. They also need to make GP a sufficiently attractive option for UK graduates so that enough of them choose it, and I don't think that the current moves are going to achieve that.
As for making cuts elsewhere - where from? There are no services in the UK that I can think of which are over-funded at present...
. They also need to make GP a sufficiently attractive option for UK graduates so that enough of them choose it, and I don't think that the current moves are going to achieve that.
As for making cuts elsewhere - where from? There are no services in the UK that I can think of which are over-funded at present...
Is wrt to the NHS reforms? I mean I know most of the medical profession is against the reforms, seriously doubting it's ability to cut red-tape, and improve patient care.
But why would the reforms put graduates off General Practition as a profession? Is it because of the control GPs will get of NHS money, would this negatively impact people's view of GP a a profession?
What are the NHS reforms?
Original post by prafto
Is wrt to the NHS reforms? I mean I know most of the medical profession is against the reforms, seriously doubting it's ability to cut red-tape, and improve patient care.
But why would the reforms put graduates off General Practition as a profession? Is it because of the control GPs will get of NHS money, would this negatively impact people's view of GP a a profession?
But why would the reforms put graduates off General Practition as a profession? Is it because of the control GPs will get of NHS money, would this negatively impact people's view of GP a a profession?
No, though I don't think the idea of having to be involved in budget control and commissioning on top of clinical care is a very attractive one. I was referring to the very public bashing GPs and doctors in general are getting from the government, and attempts to enforce weekend/evening working for GPs. People choose GP because it has less antisocial hours commitment and is more "family-friendly" than many hospital specialties. If they're going to have to work evenings and weekends, for no extra pay, people simply won't do it. They'll end up with another recruitment crisis just like there was 15 years ago.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by aldanyh
"Are you more of a leader or a follower?"
In my personal opinion, I wouldn't give a concrete answer of "Yes I am a leader due to..." or the latter, as in medicine, or especially during your progression to a career in medicine, you will be required to acquire skills of being both a leader and a follower. Leadership is a quality which is instilled with experience, as with leadership comes decision making. The necessity of doctors making decisions which can become life changing, in addition to deciding the most suitable treatment plan for a rather complex patient, separates medicine to other professions such as nursing; which focuses more on the practical aspect of patient care.
*Insert an experience on how you developed your leadership skills*
As a medical student, junior doctor, or trainee in a specific speciality, you will need to be able to accept that your knowledge has limits. It's important to acknowledge the fact that we, as medics, will never be able to know everything. This is due to the nature of science in general- its dimensions are limitless. I remember a consultant which used the saying "In medicine, you never stop learning". We need to be taught, we need to be shown aspects of the medical career that we did not even anticipate. We need to be followers; following those who have deemed to have more experience in a field that we aspire to reach.
I am both a leader, and a follower.
Do you guys agree with the Secretary of State for Health -Jeremy Hunt. It is rather common sense to have foreign patients from the EU and beyond to pay for using our National Health Service. Statistically, only around 16% of foreign nationals (residing outside the UK) that use the NHS pay for its service.
What are the positive and negative implications if international students/tourists were to come to the UK, use the NHS and get charged due to their immigration status? Do you agree with this, or do you propose a more holistic approach?
What are the positive and negative implications if international students/tourists were to come to the UK, use the NHS and get charged due to their immigration status? Do you agree with this, or do you propose a more holistic approach?
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by frogs r everywhere
Do you guys agree with the Sec.of Health Jeremy Hunt. It is rather common sense to have foreign patients from the EU and beyond to pay for using our National Health Service. Statistically, only around 16% of foreign nationals that use the NHS pay for its service.
What are the positive and negative implications if migrants/tourists were to come to the UK, use the NHS and get charged due to their immigration status? Do you agree with this, or do you propose a more holistic approach?
What are the positive and negative implications if migrants/tourists were to come to the UK, use the NHS and get charged due to their immigration status? Do you agree with this, or do you propose a more holistic approach?
I think it's right they get charged, the money we get from it (approximately 500m) can be used for new research , doctors etc.
However if a migrant poses a serious risk to society like TB/HIV, he/she should be treated immediately.
I'm aware that foreign students can use the nhs for free providing they are staying in England for a period of time which I think is fair.
I can't really see any negatives from this apart from as healthcare professionals, our duty is care to the patients so if we deny patients because they won't pay, that's doing harm which disobeys the principle of ethics: non-malefience. Also if we treat them, society will benefit from less ill/contagious people.
Original post by FlavaFavourFruit
I think it's right they get charged, the money we get from it (approximately 500m) can be used for new research , doctors etc.
However if a migrant poses a serious risk to society like TB/HIV, he/she should be treated immediately.
I'm aware that foreign students can use the nhs for free providing they are staying in England for a period of time which I think is fair.
I can't really see any negatives from this apart from as healthcare professionals, our duty is care to the patients so if we deny patients because they won't pay, that's doing harm which disobeys the principle of ethics: non-malefience. Also if we treat them, society will benefit from less ill/contagious people.
However if a migrant poses a serious risk to society like TB/HIV, he/she should be treated immediately.
I'm aware that foreign students can use the nhs for free providing they are staying in England for a period of time which I think is fair.
I can't really see any negatives from this apart from as healthcare professionals, our duty is care to the patients so if we deny patients because they won't pay, that's doing harm which disobeys the principle of ethics: non-malefience. Also if we treat them, society will benefit from less ill/contagious people.
I guess so. It is just something relevant I have seen on the news recently. A doctor on the BBC did make a comment on foreigners being discouraged to use the health service for the fear of the rather significant cost. And if you are on the far fetched left wing, in terms of politics, you may argue that one's immigration status should not be taken into account, even if they are migrants who entered the UK illegally.
What if the migrant can't be able to cover that cost? Will he be refused further treatment? Should illegal immigrants be eligible to use the NHS?
Original post by frogs r everywhere
I guess so. It is just something relevant I have seen on the news recently. A doctor on the BBC did make a comment on foreigners being discouraged to use the health service for the fear of the rather significant cost. And if you are on the far fetched left wing, in terms of politics, you may argue that one's immigration status should not be taken into account, even if they are migrants who entered the UK illegally.
What if the migrant can't be able to cover that cost? Will he be refused further treatment? Should illegal immigrants be eligible to use the NHS?
What if the migrant can't be able to cover that cost? Will he be refused further treatment? Should illegal immigrants be eligible to use the NHS?
Oh that's interesting!
If the migrant can't cover the cost, community service
lol um well I guess they'll have to pay when they return home and nhs will have to employ an agency which chases up money from migrants?? LolNo, illegal immigrants shouldn't be eligible to NHS treatment unless it's an emergency, then kick them out of the country once they're fit
Original post by FlavaFavourFruit
Another question!
If you had £5m, would you decide to fund 1000 hip replacements or fund 100 cancer-curing treatments?
Explain in detail
If you had £5m, would you decide to fund 1000 hip replacements or fund 100 cancer-curing treatments?
Explain in detail
I would probably go for the "disappearing £5m from the NHS which happens to be in my bank account"
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Dr.Ugs
I would probably go for the "disappearing £5m from the NHS which happens to be in my bank account"
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Thief!
No one can't give a medical explanation
Original post by FlavaFavourFruit
Oh that's interesting!
If the migrant can't cover the cost, community service lol um well I guess they'll have to pay when they return home and nhs will have to employ an agency which chases up money from migrants?? Lol
[No, illegal immigrants shouldn't be eligible to NHS treatment unless it's an emergency, then kick them out of the country once they're fit
If the migrant can't cover the cost, community service
lol um well I guess they'll have to pay when they return home and nhs will have to employ an agency which chases up money from migrants?? Lol[No, illegal immigrants shouldn't be eligible to NHS treatment unless it's an emergency, then kick them out of the country once they're fit
Ha!
There was an episode on Junior Doctors years ago where an illegal migrant was worried that the health professionals were to refer him to the relevant British body to have him lawfully deported. I could argue that if a foreign patient was to disclose you their illegal status, isn't it your responsibility to keep this information confidential; as the only justification to when confidentiality can be broken is when the patient or the general public is at risk of danger.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by frogs r everywhere
Do you guys agree with the Secretary of State for Health -Jeremy Hunt. It is rather common sense to have foreign patients from the EU and beyond to pay for using our National Health Service. Statistically, only around 16% of foreign nationals (residing outside the UK) that use the NHS pay for its service.
What are the positive and negative implications if international students/tourists were to come to the UK, use the NHS and get charged due to their immigration status? Do you agree with this, or do you propose a more holistic approach?
What are the positive and negative implications if international students/tourists were to come to the UK, use the NHS and get charged due to their immigration status? Do you agree with this, or do you propose a more holistic approach?
I think this issue here is not whether patients from outside the EU should be charged or not. They are already charged for care, the issue is actually how the NHS goes about recovering the money, as we treat first and ask questions later. I think part of the answer is more collaborative working with the private healthcare sector to instill an awareness of cost vs benefit culture amongst NHS staff. Things do not have to cost as much as they do, there is a great deal of waste to be addressed (in terms of both equipment and time). However, there are some taboos to break first.
Illegal immigrants and asylum seekers deserve treatment from the NHS IMHO. They are berated and scandalised by the press, but I have met many during my work, and they are often destitute, bereft, and in need of the care the NHS can offer (especially in terms of maternity and mental health services). I would never disclose a person's immigration status to the authorities if I was treating them, I would leave that to the NHS fraud teams.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by frogs r everywhere
Ha!
There was an episode on Junior Doctors years ago where an illegal migrant was worried that the health professionals were to refer him to the relevant British body to have him lawfully deported. I could argue that if a foreign patient was to disclose you their illegal status, isn't it your responsibility to keep this information confidential; as the only justification to when confidentiality can be broken is when the patient or the general public is at risk of danger.
There was an episode on Junior Doctors years ago where an illegal migrant was worried that the health professionals were to refer him to the relevant British body to have him lawfully deported. I could argue that if a foreign patient was to disclose you their illegal status, isn't it your responsibility to keep this information confidential; as the only justification to when confidentiality can be broken is when the patient or the general public is at risk of danger.
Yeah you're right, I wouldn't disclose any information of the immigrant, that's someone else's job
Original post by FlavaFavourFruit
Yeah you're right, I wouldn't disclose any information of the immigrant, that's someone else's job
Personally (and this is meant to be constructive and is not a criticism), I would be very wary of using a phrase like: "That's someone else's job" in interview. Even milder versions like: "That's not my role" can be dangerous. They can sometimes give the impression that the candidate is narrow- minded, that is to say they do not consider the impact or importance of things outside their sphere of influence.
Better to say something like: "It's not in the patient's best interest" (which is the truth in most cases), and perhaps back it up with some rationale that you would consider it, and the reasons why, but probably not do it.
Just my opinion of course, which could potentially be wrong...
Posted from TSR Mobile
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- UCAT: mock scores vs actual scores
- UCAT
- UCAT preparation for 2025 entry
- Charityworks 2024
- Ucat
- UCAT tips
- UCAT Medic Mind
- Does the sugar tax introduced in 2018 apply to wales?
- Préparation for clinical placements for student nurses
- Oxbridge Interview Prep for Medicine
- Histopathology ST1 2025
- UCAT
- Medicine Interviews
- Clinical Biochemistry Interviews (STP Applicants 2023)
- Gap Year and Medical Interviews: Traveling Back for an Offer? UK
- Looking for a TCD meeica school interview tutorl
- Plymouth interview
- Initial UCAT score
- Buckingham Medical School Interview 2024
- How to prepare for Medicine interviews?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OFFICIAL A101 Liverpool University Graduate Entry Medicine Thread 2024 EntryMedicine
77
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OFFICIAL A101 Liverpool University Graduate Entry Medicine Thread 2024 EntryMedicine
77
