News Update on the BUPA Ophthalmology Tender
December 12th 2006
In the last update on November 5th FIPO noted that BUPA has continued to press ahead with its plans to form local networks of consultants. This is being carried out nationally and BUPA have more recently approached some of the London based private hospitals where consultants so far have refused to sign up to the BUPA tender.
The advice from the BMA has been reiterated in another letter to consultants:
BMA Letter to Consultants 8th Dec 2006
In recent weeks BUPA has maintained a public relations attack on the profession and in particular on ophthalmologists. In a report in the Times on 2nd December BUPA attacked both the quality and the cost of ophthalmic surgery in a manner which is both ungracious and inaccurate as it does not portray in any sense the true picture of British Ophthalmology.
Response by the President of the Royal College of Ophthalmology
A consultant ophthalmologist responded also to the Times which declined to accept his letter and this response is available here:
Response by a senior consultant ophthalmologist
BUPA has also continued the same type of attack on professional standards on their website ( www.bupa.co.uk/about/html/pr/051206_ophthalmology.html ). FIPO deeply regrets this type of activity which is both frightening and misleading to patients. As indicated in the letter from the consultant ophthalmologist above the standard of consultant practice in British ophthalmology remains extremely high. Complications are rare and the two audits claimed by BUPA to be absent in a number of hospitals do not in any way reflect on the quality of ophthalmic surgery. This misunderstanding of clinical practice by an insurance company is perhaps anticipated as they are not experts in this or any other clinical speciality. It is thus most unfortunate that BUPA continues to malign the profession and frighten patients without any sound evidence and for reasons which are best known to themselves.
In their latest website release BUPA also claim that their research amongst consultants revealed that three quarters of consultants expected private medical insurers to take some responsibility for measuring and monitoring the effectiveness of specialists. Unfortunately, BUPA do not state how many consultants were surveyed nor indeed who they were (i.e. how selected, how interviewed and if they were BUPA advisers). Furthermore this result is at complete variance with the detailed and massive questionnaire of just under 1000 orthopaedic and ENT consultants carried out by FIPO. These consultants stated quite categorically that BUPA should not be a quasi regulator or assess or regulate consultants. In answer to this question 93% of orthopaedic surgeons and 94% of ENT surgeons stated that BUPA has no role in assessing specialists and only 2% and 3% respectively agreed with this proposition ( the balance was made up of 2% or 3% unstated or unsure replies). A briefing document on this report can be read here:
Consultant Opinion about the BUPA Strategy