The British Medical Association seems to have headed off a rebellion by family doctors against a new contract which will let them provide services traditionally confined to hospitals, according to a Guardian survey.

More than half of Britain's 120 local medical committees (LMCs), which are in effect branches of the association, said doctors planned to accept the deal, which ministers hope will reduce the pressure on overstretched hospitals.

But they said that many of the 43,000 GPs felt they had been coerced into voting yes by the government's warning that rejection would put this year's promised 12% pay rise, better pensions and the chance to opt out of providing out-of-hours care in jeopardy.

Charles Simenoff, chairman of Manchester LMC, said: "GPs are voting yes very reluctantly. But what option do we have, given the threats by the government that we would lose out financially if we didn't back it?

"We feel extremely disappointed and annoyed with the BMA. If it sees a yes vote as a personal endorsement it would be very much mistaken."

Of the 67 LMCs surveyed by the Guardian, 65 said that GPs in their area would vote yes and only one, Stockport, said it would vote no. One said that the outcome was too close to predict. Forty-four committee chairmen said that they had already voted yes or would probably do so.

About half the LMCs backing the contract said that they expected about 60% in favour. The vote is expected to be even closer in London, Greater Manchester and the West Midlands, where committee chairs predicted that up to 55% would vote yes.

Acceptance of the deal is essential for the BMA, which is still reeling from the refusal of senior hospital doctors in England and Wales to accept a new contract endorsed by the association.

The new GP contract, announced in February, is aimed at attracting more medical students into general practice and stemming the tide of early retirements by allowing doctors to control their workloads.

Some practices will be able to offer a no-frills service without out-of-hours cover, while others will be rewarded for providing minor surgery.

If the contract is rejected ministers are likely to wonder whether it is worth dealing with the BMA in future.

But the committees have told the BMA, which negotiated the deal with NHS managers, not to take comfort from a yes vote.

Some said GPs were planning a vote of no confidence in the BMA's GPs committee, which was forced to revise the contract substantially after it became apparent that 70% of doctors would be worse off because of flaws in the funding arrangements.

Simon Parkinson, secretary of Worcester LMC, said: "There will be a weary yes vote. The recent changes have improved the financial arrangements but there's nothing in the contract to attract people into the profession or to encourage them to stay."

Andrew Sapsford, chairman of Buckinghamshire LMC, said GPs were voting yes because they did not want to "end up in limbo" like the hospital consultants. He said: "It's very much a vote for the lesser of two evils."

Three medical accountancy firms which represent about half the family doctors also predicted that despite the widespread unhappiness most GPs would back the deal because it would boost their earnings by up to 26%.

Laurence Slavin, a partner in the accountants Ramsay Brown & partners, said: "As a contract it's still flawed, but because it brings in more money a lot of GPs have decided to vote for it anyway."