Offering up his own take on Pulse’s writing competition, editor Jaimie Kaffash reflects on the two doctors that left a lasting impact on him
I’ve just finished my first read of the entries for the writing competition. The response was fantastic, and I genuinely enjoyed reading all of them – whether it was about That One Patient or My Big Idea.
It also gave me the inspiration to write my own version. Now, obviously I don’t have any patients, and I think readers are probably sick of My Big Ideas. But reading the entries brought to mind two doctors, who have stayed with me.
I have mentioned in my editorials before that my wife had a kidney transplant almost 23 years ago. I met her 15 years ago, and I never saw the most traumatic parts of the episode and its aftermath. Obviously, she has been a regular user of the NHS. Her health problems, some of which were a result of the transplant, others not, are lengthy. It is a macabre joke of ours that the cardiac arrest she had on an operating table (which was unrelated to her transplant) is so low down on the list of her health conditions that she often forgets to mention it to doctors.
I often go to appointments with her, at her behest, so we see a lot of doctors. But two have stuck with me.
I won’t go into the details of the health problems (they are not mine to tell). But these two doctors were able to instill a sense of hope, and get to the bottom of the problems. Both these specialists, who we saw on the NHS, showed empathy, took everything she said seriously, delved deeply into her medical history (having already prepared for the consultation), explained everything clearly, practised genuine shared-decision-making – appreciating that she had lived with her transplant for more than two decades and had insight into her own health. As a result, their actions led to noticeable improvements in her life.
Now, I suspect I have alienated parts of our readership who may be fearing I am going to get into a rant about their care compared with GPs. That’s not where this is going.
We have countless seen GPs (and, indeed, other specialists) who have showed empathy, took concerns seriously, checked in with my wife post-consultation and provided the highest standards of care. The reason these two specialists stood out for me is that we had an hour with each of them. They had the time to really understand the patient and to provide effective interventions as a result.
Time with a patient isn’t a guaranteed panacea – we have met specialists who displayed little empathy, or didn’t take the time to fully understand the medical history. But giving a good doctor time with a patient is the best way to provide the most effective care.
So let me pivot to My Big Idea. Let’s stop the focus on GP access. Yes, access is important. But giving doctors the appropriate length of time to spend with patients is more important, and not just for those who know how to book double appointments. Is an electoral promise of ‘seeing a GP within seven days’ really more attractive than ’30 minutes with a GP if you really need it’? Of course there would be numerous problems with this. But, reshifting this focus would benefit patients – and GPs, too.
Jaimie Kaffash is editor of Pulse. Follow him on X @jkaffash or email him at [email protected]
