The future of UK podiatry/footcare ?

Mark

Much of what you say has merit, so are you in a position to put some meat on the bones?

This is how I see 'the current situation'.
The foot care market can be conveniently divided into two-the regulated and the unregulated sectors. Both are supplied by a diverse industry of marketers- from the general pod items like C&p to the high tech end eg computer aided gait analysis and laser technology.

The other division is between public and private providers.What we are now seeing is a blurring of that division with the introduction of NHS backed third sector providers- who because they are considered 'social care' , can charge for what at one time was free. They are not answerable to the HPC , but to the CQC, as are the NHS.

Overseeing this eclectic mix are at least 4 professional bodies, a NHS commissioned degree training program, a NHS commissioned assistant grades training programe, a NHS volunteer training program, at least 4 private trainers, and an 'independent regulator, and the Department of Health.

Your description fails to mention the "foot beauty industry" ,medical GPs ,nurses, physios, the pharmacists, and anyone else who stake a claim on the foot.

The aims and objectives of this new Professional body is to bring order and commercialism to this 'chaos'. Quite how this will be achieved, I cannot see.

Mark, does any of this agree with your thoughts?

Cornmerchant

 

A profession that indulges in uneccessary introspection and relies on statutory third party agencies for its practice situation, is one that is doomed to failure irrespective of its potential. Look through this site and you will note the vast majority of enquiries and informative posts relate to clinical matters - which is great - yet only a small number of posts concern themselves with promoting and building the pratice environment - these primarily from podiatrists in the private sector. Much of those debate the problems and threats to future viability be it regulation, competition or representation. We spend a great deal of time discussing, endlessly, developments not of our own choosing or making, yet proposals to rectify these troubles are rarely forthcoming, giving the impression that we are, as a profession, somewhat impotent when it comes to securing our future. That strikes me as a little sad, for without a viable future, the danger is that podiatry will fragment to such a degree that cohesion and collective strength would be impossible to achieve, thus rendering any real hope of podiatry as a mainstream discipline with all the attendant benefits and rewards that implies, to history. Jobs come and go. Where are the coalmen, or milkmen these days? The scenario George describes could mean that UK podiatry staggers down the same road to professional obscurity. The problem is not just in the UK - there are parallel debates about the future of podiatry practice in Australia and the US with similar issues, especially the implications of government policies to the practice environment. Change is fluid - there will always be threats and opportunities. A dynamic profession or trade is one that safeguards against the first and exploits the other. Are we, as a profession, there yet?

I would like to think most pods - at some time during their careers - devote some thought to 'what could be'. There can't be that many colleagues who don't dream of a podiatry utopia where their skills and abilities are properly appreciated and respected and rewarded instead of scraping a living and facing an uncertain future. You ask what I would do - if there is any meat on the bones? Turn the question round - you have my suggestion; what's yours? The meat on the bones are the ideas of all those directly concerned with podiatry - from the trade, clinicians, academics - everyone with a vested interest in podiatry's future. Let's hear your vision of your podiatry future and your proposals for getting there - and anyone elses - then we'll see if we have a fatted cow or a bag of old bones!

 

Hi All

Mark, I think you make very positive comments as usual and George your post was informative if not somewhat depressing. The CQC thing is something I have not heard of before and can see that hitting me badly in the time I have left.

Can I ask if you know of any professional body that has challenged this apparent "monopoly"in the creating ??. One would hope with a change of government that is overdue to one that embraces private industry to create jobs may help but I wont hold my breath.

Mark you know Bob yourself and I tried some years ago to unite the profession and move it forward to speak with one voice. It failed why?? Because of those on all sides that will not leave the past behind and move on.

That is as true today as it was then THAT is what has held us back.

You are absolutely spot on the markets are FLUID we have to ride with them and be as adaptable.
An Example

Correct CM I do both in my practice which once was thought a podiatry domain, but now Osteopaths, Chiropractics, Physiotherapists,Sports Therapists, Shoe shops are ALL getting in on the act whilst we have been sooo busy in fighting and bickering and basically refusing to change until that change is forced upon us now a few are waking up to the realities of business.

Any future Pods in training should have at least 6 months of business studies worked into the course at some point so that when they do come out into the big wide world at least they will be prepared and have the knowledge of how to set up and run a viable business. We have as George pointed out the war between the NHS pods v IPP v FHP v whoever else.

Until we can work together as one unit and forge our way forward I fear we are doomed to be dispersed and follow the coalman milkmen and all the rest that have gone before.

We NEED to be privatised by someone /something. We NEED structure and balance among ourselves we NEED foresight and business sense. Mark has an answer it would work BUT the old ways will have to change if it is going to.

Dido, you are perfectly correct but don't feel bad about that I have had isolation forced upon me for over 20 years in this profession:bang:

I'm still here, dosent that tell you something ??

Now at last I can network with other pods because some have seen the light. They visit me we research ,discuss, argue (no suprises there )

I learn about their ways they learn about mine a win win situation,an understanding of differences and a way FORWARD !!

If we cannot overcome this, George and Marks words will come true and I fear that to be the case because for over 20 years I and others have been trying to get the change and I'm still trying.

Mark, Remember the rows we had on here all those years ago when you were an NHS pod?? Now your an IPP think how your mindset has changed to my way of thinking as an IPP :drinks

Your plan ?give it a go you can have my £100 when you like

Just my take

Cheers
Derek

 

Thank you to all that have joined this debate.

I appreciate that no-one has, as yet, ridiculed my interpretation of Government Policy and the consequent direction of movement of both the public and private sectors.

Mark, you write defensively. The quizzing you are getting is out of interest, not criticism. It is an "interesting" plan but it has many holes in it that need filling in, funding, in my opinion being the biggest hole of all. The only way this is going to move forwards is by you selecting a team of interested parties, inviting them to a central venue for a session of brainstorming. It will either become a no go, with everyone walking away or it may progress. No matter what you need a budget; you need reps from all interest Podiatry parties including the trade to get this 1st stage off the ground.

I have done everything possible from "within" my professional body (SCP) to try and raise concerns about potential long term professional damage by following government directives. Unfortunately my concerns have been classed as dissension and I am certain this has been based on too many conflicts of interest and personal ambition by SCP "leaders". There are no current plans to develop a commercial strategy by SCP to support its members. This could change given evidence coming forwards about "a keen interest" by SCP regarding regional developments in NHS Podiatry Departments as highlighted in my earlier post. Too little too late perhaps? I think so. It certainly seems that any strategy to develop support to its private sector members has been given over to unpaid committee members with no guarantee of a budget. In my opinion this is a futile exercise.

The biggest problem with proposing change is to engage with those who want change and convince those that don't think change is needed to be aware of the national picture of future foot care within all sectors of service provision.

Derek, I agree with your sentiments and likewise I am prepared to put money where my mouth is and to put 3 patients worth into the kitty. Is my earlier posting depressing or does it give us the grit to fight positively with?

GB

PS Derek, the Care Quality Commission is the renamed and powered up Healthcare Commission.

 

Hi George

If and only if enough pods take this on board you are exactly right and I commend you for your tenacity and yes a reason to take heed and go forward.

There as I said you have it the old religion carping on and not addressing the current problems.

Look , the private trainers all have a philosophy :- You pay me a couple of thousand, we will give A training in podiatry and send you out into the big wide world to set up a business = non refundable = you cant make it happen = o/k = we will give you advanced skills = you pay more thousand £ and try again= ad infinitum.
If you CANT make a go of it = Tough your obviously the wrong person for this career = we have your money we are there if you can think of anything else that we can help you with=at a cost= a multi million pound turnover because people believe they can do it and the providers pump up that belief = BUSINESS ACUMEN :bang:

You will never stop that, it is shrewd marketing and not illegal or promising anything that cant be done ( I am living proof of that) Sorry

The problem then goes to , I have a failed business = but I still love feet or whatever = I will do home visits on the elderly @ say a fiver a time = Oh age concern will pay me £12 a time = I'll be a volunteer

See where its going.

You are SCP orientated as are many ( as MARK used to be) with the deepest respect you are as naive to the business world as the rest George and I do not mean that in a hurtful or disespectful way just look at the overall picture and see what you are up against with private trainers.

They will survive on the dreams of the public. The NHS / Ex NHS pod has a totally different mindset as did Mark at one time but now advocates as I have done for many years the IPP's roll in the profession.

We MUST accept that the NHS is being run on Private practice values =profit and business viability over all else. That is it the FLUID part of progress and a profit is essential in ALL businesses mine is no different, NO PROFIT = NO BUSINESS.

It boils down to a hearts and minds thing as you said but time is running out( if it hasn't already) and those that are stupid enough to think they can bumble along as they have been in the past will learn a very harsh lesson in the not too distant future .

George thank you for indulging me I do appreciate your tolerance
Cheers
Derek

 

Ther is a strong possibility that the creation of a "new order" in its entirety is what will never get over the first hurdle.
One could consider trying to copy a wheel already in existance as a model to emulate, rather than reinventing one.

Wellness Chiropractic has a great model, like it or not.
Presenting a corporate identity (motels ahve been doing this for years, you could be anywhere but it all looks largely the same).
They have professional litereature that is purchased from the main body, that thye issue to their patients.

They have a similar simple practice layout that soothes the patient on arrival and wher they can feel that it is just like the last place they went to if they are visiting a different town.

Their websites are similar etc.

What they have done is to create at first a visual uniformity/identity. it helps that they all pretty much believe things the same way too in regard to what they are up to.

Wellness is a recogniseable image but not by being a professional body.This is their marketing presentation.
It is what sets an attainable business environment, and an identity that is bought into by the practitioner.

They very much believe in a wholistic/organic lifstyle so they even tend to use the same beiges and rush matting and natural colours from clinic to cliinic.

I think this model is a style (with moderatecahnges) that is worth aping, without it busting anyones budget.

 

George.

in reply to your comments.

I dont believe we will EVER get to the stage where there isnt a waiting list in the NHS except for real emergancies where, I believe the NHS are the best.

AS for my practise supporting "my lifestyle" without my husbands support. proberbly not but i could ask the same for you ,no doubt your wifes( if you have one as i dont goggle to find out about people), helps your life style.

yes if i was the only one earning mqny things would hve to go but no more or less than other people who lose their jobs or have other misfortunes happen to them.

I find it very intrusive that you have "googled" me and think you can make comments on what you think is my lifestyle

 

A very interesting thread.

The fact that the profession did not go 'dental' is a great shame.

So, 'social enterprise' is a governmental half-step, whereby an enterprise can be commissioned to treat NHS patients without competition from the free market?

The reason for this what? To try and leverage control? If a business is a 'social enterprise' does that make them answerable to the NHS in full? ie No recourse to treat private patients? Or is it simply and attempt to try and avoid the nasty stigma of having to say that they are paying private companies to do free at the point of entry NHS treatment? A private company that makes 'a profit!' (Insert dramatic music here.)

One other issue that does not seem to have been brought up. We have a state of play where NHS patients are routinely being triaged, and kicked off waiting lists, after a care aims model is applied to them. Where do they go? They either go back to doctor on the referral/waiting list merry-go-round or they look elsewhere. Most I would argue come to see a state/HPC registered Podiatrist.

Now, if social enterprises fill a gap by providing low risk footcare to those not deemed worthy of NHS treatment (at a subsidized price), they still have to be funded partly by NHS. I would love to see a cost benefit analysis of how social enterprises will save the NHS money and still provide much needed care. Where is the saving? Will they regulate the salaries of those who run social enterprises, to stem the siphoning of this 'public money' falling into private bank accounts?

I am wondering whether social enterprises will be able to cope with demand, thus undercutting Private Pods from functioning in the market? Or are they another pipe dream trying to patch the cracks of what appears to be self evident, NHS logos or not. The NHS can ill afford to treat a growing population of patients with podiatric needs.

 

An astute summary of chronic interference and mismanagement in the health market to suit political ideology rather than patient needs. I remember speaking to a colleague in Scotland - head of a regional NHS Trust podiatry department - who agreed that the dental model would have been the best way of organising general podiatric practice, but was completely against the proposal to introduce it, on the basis that "...the bastards (private practitioners) would earn more than me."

Quite.

 

Not necessarily. Social care enterprises seem to attract initial pump priming funds and without either a tendering or commissioning process, become the preferred provider of low risk care on the basis that they are perceived to fill an unmet need during NHS service reprofiling.

You may have a point. Perhaps this is a question to be directed at NHS Podiatry Managers?

Again not necessarily. Social Care Enterprises have taken on Podiatrists onto the pay role to deal with patients falling outside the scope of low risk work so the dismissed have no need to look elsewhere and again the work diverts away from the traditional IPP. In fact patients are being misled into paying twice within this model - once for nail cut and a 2nd fee to see "the chiropodist" . Crafty but legitimate trading.

Again not necessarily. By avoiding the costs of regulation and normal business costs, waste uplift, instruments, room hire etc there is no need for price subsidy and no funding needed by NHS. If you and I had none of the traditional costs of running a business and patients bought and supplied their own instruments, a nail cut every 15 minutes on a 5 week turn around regardless of the actual time needed between visits - quite profitable - especially if you were the preferred named provider at point of NHS patient discharge

Depends on what model of Social Care Enterprise the NHS are partnering with. Pilot schemes where initial pump priming by NHS, then independent of funding once SE is established but prefered provider/ partnership seems to be very much favoured by DoH.

Only time will tell, but massive changes are already taking place in the market of foot care and if we are not informed of these changes how do we in IPP keep up, develop our marketing strategies to compete if we want/need to compete?

GB

 

What a sh!te profession that has members willing to undermine the future of their colleagues for a few pieces of silver. What is the Society's position on Social Enterprise companies? Nonchalant perchance?

 

Hi George. Thanks for the answers.

Does this suggest they are a temporary stop gap whilst NHS strategy is formulated, and allowed to settle?

It appears to me a very clever way of introducing payment for service. You use NHS resources, initial NHS money, and NHS branding, to provide low risk care to the patient, but when they are surprised that they have to pay up, you explain to them that it isn't actually NHS treatment at all.

Mark is certainly correct. It is a political side step. Instead of being honest and saying 'listen, we can not afford to treat your corn every 3 months for free, so you are going to have to chip in, a bit like NHS dentistry' they create a proxy to do it, thus saving the political shame of being accused of increasing pay at the point of entry services. Let us face it. It is payment for another NHS service via the back door.

That is the reason why we do not offer a nail cut. We 'cast a knowing eye over the foot' when treating (to steal a phrase from a Podiatry Now contributor). I am not in the business of haggling over whether a nail is thickened enough to not be a simple cut, or whether I can do reduce callus 'whilst I am there'.

This segregation of the profession does indeed confuse the public. There was me thinking HPC registration might standardise training and competence, after the grandparented Chiropodists retire. Anyway.

A point to ponder. I might be more innocent than the relationship between Mickey and Minnie Mouse here, but does anybody have a set of statistics that indicate vast swathes of patients being 'reprofiled' (double plus good) who only need their nails cut?

We (One full time, and two part time Pods) treat 90-100 patients a week, and seldom have a patient in who only needs a straight forward nail cut.

What I am concerned about is the 'care aims' merry-go-round, where in a cynical ploy to eliminate waiting lists without increasing treatment, not only is risk reevaluated, but if a medical problem (Heloma Durum for example) can not be cured, then the care aims model dictates that the patient is referred on to somebody else and discharged, or just discharged full stop. Where does that patient go? Back to the doctor to be re-referred? Recommended to go see and SE? Or just told that they will have to private if they want their corn doing until the end of time?

Thanks. I am really interested in a definitive answer into how price and salary is regulated, if at all.

What can we do? If the society is inert in this matter, how should we act to be part of the consultation?

 

All part of the political health merry-go-round. I certainly get a sense of deja vu at the duplicity of NHS management and their political masters.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2549395.stm Why can't the politicians just be honest and say the NHS will pay for X treatment and the patient will pay for Y treatment. That way, we, as a profession can structure our care accordingly. What concerns me more is the "professional input" by members of our own profession - and the seemingly determined drive to destroy private practice for a model of care that is more politically acceptable. That the Society are inert - good description - is a disgrace.

 

Mark

Ive selected a few quotes from this thread just to highlight the sad state we have arrived at :bang:

As you know as i'm a gradparented podiarist I have and still am recieveing attack after attack from the biggoted old guard which would appear to be as clued up as usual.

Here's just one example

The fact there are many 30 year olds that were grandparented in I suppose another 30 years wait in the mythical cocoon wont matter will it ?? Never mind unity never mind advancing the profession as a whole just keep the spite and vitriol going, self importance will prevail in the end !! :sinking:


Now we get to the real problem

The separatism from within ,in fighting etc is what is holding us back.

Yet another example

And dont forget the clueless green eyed monster :wacko: Many IPP's ( the bastards) probably earn more than him already so he's really well informed but clueless as to the real ways of the world.

Ive tried to make sense of this attitude for many years and now it looks like yourself and many other IPP's will suffer because of it.

I don't know the answer Mark but looking at this thread as a whole ssshiropody on the cheap is back , we will see how many IPP's survive and how many NHS jobs remain in the end result.

I think the term for this profession is ...self destructing :craig:

Just an observation and opinion.

Cheers

Derek

 

Hi Derek

I apologise. I was not having a dig at those that do not have a degree in podiatry, honestly. If you have been grand-parented in, it is because you hopefully demonstrate an experience in the field, which is comparable to the training given. You also of course have to undertake CPD to ensure you are up to scratch.

There was a problem with any Tom, Dick, Or Harry calling themselves a chiropodist and damaging patients. HPC registration helps to solve that problem. There are still a few bad eggs in the basket (we have to solve a lot of their mistakes), but I am also sure that you may well be a better clinician than some with the letters after their name.

Again, no offense. I just see that we seem to make a correct move toward standardisation, only to then re muddy the clean water with FHPs.

You might be right Derek. Ultimately the pull is regression back to a place where the meagerly trained and regulated do chiropody on the cheap. What was the point in HPC registration and CPD points in the first place?

Or perhaps, it is the death throes of a government, and come six months, the new broom comes in and cuts budgets with a sharper pair of scissors and the IPP continues trading as normal.

 

Hi Jimbob

Accepted

It must be the "Bob" part of your name that made me a bit oversensitive

We have to have help from somewhere because we are certainly not helping ourselves. We can only hope a change from this Marxist government to one that will embrace enterprise and job creation will succeed them.
Time will tell
Cheers
Derek

 

Dell

Up till now I have not engaged in this thread.

Your reference to my name only endorses your unfounded prejudice.

I can now boast the high ground of going 'independent' you still pay your fees to your certificate owning Masters.

Please do not in future accuse me of posting under the influence of alcohol?

I probably know more than you ever will about this thread.

Come on how high up in the BChPA are you?

Bob

 

Wonderful. Back to the snip and growl. And we wonder why no-one takes this profession seriously. Goodbye.

 

Oh dear but your going too now by the looks of it

And my total indifference at your eternal bigotry and mischief making .

Wot as a pig farmer ( albeit a little one)

Ok then must be the other option you HAVE totally lost it !!

Yes and Im sure now your here we are going to hear the same thing over and over again ad infinitum as per usual like those terrible grandparented etc :boohoo:

I'm not high just an ordinary member coz they do my insurance as as Ive told you many many times it is too expensive to change at this point in time because of the year up front clause.

I have also told you as many if not more times, I hold no aliegence to anyone except me,myself and I which has stood me in good stead for a long long time.

I have answered all your questions from the sterilisation thread and now on this thread out of courtesy and perhaps sympathy.

If you can bring anything NEW to the discussion fine if not give it a rest coz your boring me and everyone else it would appear:hammer:

Cheers
Derek

 

Mark / Bob

Get the point now Bob and the rest ??

Every one is sick of it !!!:butcher:

Leave it and move forward !!

Mark don't leave, this has spilled over from another thread you are making much sense and you have a future in the profession, stick with it please

This is just another example of what has to be overcome to move forward.

Sorry not promoted by me just under attack as usual

Cheers
Derek

 

Mark / Bob

Quote:
Wonderful. Back to the snip and growl. And we wonder why no-one takes this profession seriously. Goodbye.

Mark you are of course right it is the snip and growl that halted any progress; unless you look at it from another direction and accept the snipe and growl and find a way around it.

So far neither you or Del have presented a way forward. Yes you have a scheme but have failed to put any flesh on it despite repeated requests. Del also has not shown any solution accept referring back to a time when we did arguably try and work together.

Get the point now Bob and the rest ??

Oh yes Del I get the point.,


Every one is sick of it !!! and yes 'everyone is sick of it'.,


Leave it and move forward !!, but please tell me how you and those nauseous people will move forward?

Mark don't leave, this has spilled over from another thread you are making much sense and you have a future in the profession, stick with it please

So Del we agree lets hear Mark and his future.


[COLOR="Blue"]This is just another example of what has to be overcome to move forward. Sorry not promoted by me just under attack as usual[/COLOR]

Del your attempt to play the victim is at the best amusing, perhaps it is time for you to open a bottle?

Bob,

 

Derek

I have to hand it to you mate- whenever you appear on a thread - it all goes to pot! I wonder why that is?

Every disparaging remark you make about others is actually about yourself . you just fail to see it.

Mark -I believe you can rise above this- shall we get back to how we can procure the future of the profession?

 

Bob

No Bob you wont goad me into what I really want to say in plain English

You alone have done more damage to this profession that anyone that went before you and you are so thick you cannot see it can you??


Cumon then lets hear you NEW vision for the salvation of the Podiatry profession!!


You challenge Mark with no meat on the bone, I think you have no brain in your head to make that assumption.:wacko:

You obviously have far to much time on your hands and dream up your soooo important input into the Arena.

Bob its boring, its in the past get back to your farming and let the rest of us get on with trying to salvage this profession which will be better achieved without you and yours input.

Goodbye Bob the pigs are calling you igs:

D

 

Im not speaking for Mark as you say he can speak for himself, I am just sickened YET AGAIN that you and yours are determined to discredit anyone that tries to unite this sad profession and move forward.

Where are YOUR suggestions BOB or your mates ??? I don't hear any at all just the droning on of negativity and division

I am not suggesting I lead anyone anywhere ,your usual twisting of the facts to imply your own importance in the matter is so transparent to be pathetic.

I'll ask you AGAIN list your way forward Bob you or your mates , cumon give us a clue for the utopia for the future ????

Oh yes that'll be you then I suppose?? yet another claim to the fame of negativity with no viable solution ?? :bang:

Abuse ?? yes bob they say you cant educate pork but I still try :deadhorse:

Your prospectus for recovery , were all waiting ??

Cant wait :morning:
Derek

 

This is a bitterly disappointing turn for a thread which showed potential in exploring thoughts, concerns and a deep lack of knowledge of the intention of NHS/DoH and Government engagement with the third sector and social enterprises.

I beg that the moderators rather than lock this thread edit out the unpleasant posts that have sadly been made today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Brandy
Not necessarily. Social care enterprises seem to attract initial pump priming funds and without either a tendering or commissioning process, become the preferred provider of low risk care on the basis that they are perceived to fill an unmet need during NHS service reprofiling.

Jimbob, I am sorry, I cannot answer this question. As you well know service reprofiling commenced a couple of years back with "empowerment" and progressed from there to the Age Concern volunteer cutters to fill the unmet need. Social care enterprises soon followed. NHS strategy changes with the seasons so who knows what will come next.

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Brandy
Again not necessarily. Social Care Enterprises have taken on Podiatrists onto the pay role to deal with patients falling outside the scope of low risk work so the dismissed have no need to look elsewhere and again the work diverts away from the traditional IPP. In fact patients are being misled into paying twice within this model - once for nail cut and a 2nd fee to see "the chiropodist" . Crafty but legitimate trading.

It is your choice whether to offer a nail cut or not. Why haggle? I thought you had the ability to assess and advise on the level of care your patient requires and at what cost. The operatives in Social Care Enterprises do not have the ability to assess hence the need to hand over at further cost to the field expert.

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Brandy
Again not necessarily. By avoiding the costs of regulation and normal business costs, waste uplift, instruments, room hire etc there is no need for price subsidy and no funding needed by NHS. If you and I had none of the traditional costs of running a business and patients bought and supplied their own instruments, a nail cut every 15 minutes on a 5 week turn around regardless of the actual time needed between visits - quite profitable - especially if you were the preferred named provider at point of NHS patient discharge

Perhaps the NHS reprofilers are collating these statistics?

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Brandy
Depends on what model of Social Care Enterprise the NHS are partnering with. Pilot schemes where initial pump priming by NHS, then independent of funding once SE is established but preferred provider/ partnership seems to be very much favoured by DoH.

Then you need information on every Social Care Enterprise that exists. Some Social Care Enterprises are Private Limited Companies and I doubt that the NHS can either regulate price or salary in this situation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Brandy
Only time will tell, but massive changes are already taking place in the market of foot care and if we are not informed of these changes how do we in IPP keep up, develop our marketing strategies to compete if we want/need to compete?

GB

What can we do? Research and understand the implications of Social Enterprises; be aware of how the DoH is redefining footcare and Podiatry. As IPPs it is up to us to keep ourselves informed of the changes of Government Policy. You have missed the consultation period.

To quote from February Pod Now :

"Council agreed that a briefing on the implications of social enterprises should be prepared for members."

Council last met in November 2009. Today is 10 February 2010. Social Care Enterprises, providing an alternative provision of foot care, have existed for the last 2 to 3 years. Inert is the most apt of descriptions.

I also share similar concerns that the HPC, amongst other things, have failed to implement standardisation throughout the profession. Whilst there is probably no evidence to suggest low risk footcare providers put their customers at risk through a lack of decontamination as advised by the MHRA, there is a concern that we shall see a slide back to Hibitaine soaked cottonwool and one set of instruments does for all.

Whilst those in IPP locally have looked to our various professional bodies for advise, they have failed to engage. We therefore feel it is time to meet together on this one topic to brainstorm a way forward. This meeting will include IPPs from all walks and has developed from a strong and common bond developed over almost 6 years of networking together. Our aim is along the lines of cooperation by all interested parties and the promotion of the high standards that we, as a network, have worked hard over these years to achieve. Perhaps a simpe way of progressing but a darn sight more achieveable and proactive than anything that has been suggested so far.

GB