Plans to delay the delivery of a second dose of a Govt vaccine to more than 500,000 people who received the first jab have caused an uproar among doctors, who say canceling appointments is a waste of time, confusing patients and unethical.
On Wednesday the government announced a change in its Govt vaccination strategy, saying that the second doses of the newly approved Oxford / AstraZeneca vaccine and the previously approved Pfizer / BioNtech job will now be offered for up to 12 weeks after the first dose.
This action applies to persons who are scheduled to have a second dose of Pfizer Jab after January 4, and to those who have not yet received the Jab. The government said it hoped the approach would give some people some protection from the disease as soon as possible.
However, the announcement sparked controversy, warning that maximum protection against Pfizer and Bioentech Coward requires two doses of the vaccine, and that there is no evidence that the first dose provided protection only three weeks later.
Now doctors have said canceling appointments for the second dose will take more time and lead to confusion.
Professor of Primary Care and Public Health at Imperial College London, G.P. Azim Majeed, a trainee, said he was shocked by the change of plans.
“We already have thousands or tens of thousands of people who have booked their second jabs, all of whom are elderly, so they often have to make special arrangements for their care or have someone drop them. Someone has to cancel their appointments and re-register all of these patients, so it’s for the people. It is going to create a lot of work, ”he said.
“It is clear that the people who make these rules are not the ones who have to enforce them. I understand the rationale that the government wants to increase the supply of vaccines to ensure that more people are vaccinated, but I think it could have been more disruptive to people already, rather than canceling those already booked.”
A doctor, who spoke to the Guardian anonymously, said he hoped to continue with the original schedule of the second dose rather than cancel appointments, otherwise doing so would endanger their most vulnerable patients and breach promises to patients.
The British Medical Association said it was “unreasonable and utterly unreasonable” to expect the procedure to be canceled and an appointment made for a second dose.
PMA’s GPS Dr. Richard Vutre, chairman of the committee, said: “It is very unreasonable for tens of thousands of our most critically ill patients to try to reconsider their appointments now. Local leaders tell us that it is unprofessional and unprofessional to make appointments for thousands of vulnerable, elderly patients, especially those who have been booked and who have already made arrangements for a second vaccination in the next two weeks. ”
Vadre called on the government to release scientifically verified justification for the new approach, and said re-registration of appointments would cause huge logistical problems. “For example, communicating with just 2,000-year-olds or even vulnerable patients would take a team of up to five staff per training a week, which is simply unacceptable. BMA believes the current commitment to these patients by NHS and local physicians should be respected. If the PPPs decide, the PMA will support them. ”
G.P. of Oxford University. And Dr Helen Salisbury, medical adviser to the Health Experience Research Group, who tweeted that Health Secretary Matt Hankcock should help his elderly patients communicate by phone and explain to them why their second jab was delayed. He said his primary care network needed to cancel and re-register 1,160 appointments.
“In 5 minutes of a phone call, it works 193 hours. Not to mention sadness and anger. ” She wrote.
Salisbury Asked the General Medical Council To provide advice. “I have been instructed to use a vaccine outside of its certification and approved schedule, in violation of the promise I made to my elderly patients, which could possibly put them at risk. Please consult.”
His comments have unleashed responses from other GPs, with some questioning whether it is ethical to delay the second dose when patients approve the first dose on the basis that they will receive the second dose after the first three weeks.
However, others welcomed the change in attitude. Dr. Ed Turnham, GP in Norwich, said the pharmaceutical and health products regulatory agency To be congratulated To its “bold, practical end”.
He Tweeted: “I think most of our elderly patients will be happy that this will reduce the delay in protecting their friends and relatives and reduce the risk that hospitals will be overcrowded.”