Nearly 5,000 more midwives will be needed by 2012 if the Government is to meet its target for maternity services, the Royal College of Midwives said yesterday.
The college has increased its target from 3,000 because of a rising birthrate, which has exceeded government estimates, and a reassessment of present shortages.
The call came on the same day that a baby was born in the back of an ambulance after her mother was unable to give birth at her nearest hospital because there were not enough midwives on duty.
In April the Government published its blueprint for maternity services, promising women a choice of where to have their babies.
The RCM said at the time that the proposals could not be delivered without at least another 3,000 midwives. But it has now revised the figure upwards, arguing that many trends threaten to upset the Government’s plans.
There has been a 12.5% rise in the birthrate since 2001, but midwife numbers have risen by only 4.5% since 1997.
The RCM said that fewer midwives were being trained, and even those who did qualify found it hard to get jobs because of the cuts made to bring the NHS back into financial balance.
Nearly half of all midwives are due to retire in the next decade, the RCM said, but demand for their services is greater because births are becoming more complex.
Louise Silverton, deputy general secretary of the RCM, said: “We have real concerns about the Government’s ability to deliver because there are simply not enough midwives.”
Scarborough and North East Yorkshire NHS Trust, which ran a £7.2 million deficit last year but is planning to break even this year, provoked a row by announcing plans to cut 600 jobs, a third of its workforce.
It also plans to cut all deliveries at maternity wards in Malton, Whitby and Bridlington in favour of a unit in Scarborough.
A lack of midwives at Malton Hospital forced Sally West, 36, to take a 26-mile trip to Scarborough. Malton is only three miles from her home and she had expected to give birth to her daughter there. Instead Phoebe was delivered in an ambulance in the car park of Scarborough Hospital.
Clive Milson, Phoebe’s father, accused hospital bosses of “gambling with people’s lives” and urged them to keep the units open.
“We were fortunate there were no complications.”
Friday 31 August 2007
Gloucestershire: Mental health beds 'centralised'
In-patient services are being axed at three mental health units for elderly people in Gloucestershire, reports the BBC.
Beds at Weavers Croft in Stroud, Colliers Court in Cinderford and Holly House in Gloucester will be transferred to a centre in Cheltenham.
Gloucestershire Partnership NHS Trust claimed that the changes would provide patients with a higher quality of care. But the county council's health overview and scrutiny committee said the closures would badly affect relatives who would have to travel further to visit loved ones.
The Department of Health said that after carefully considering the IRP's review, it would be "difficult to sustain safe services in four inpatient units", recommending that arrangements should be made to facilitate travel and access to Charlton Lane.
The Gloucestershire Partnership NHS Trust announced last year that it would be cutting almost £10m from mental health services in the county.
Forest of Dean MP Mark Harper said he was "disappointed" with the decision.
"I am very concerned about the difficulty of transport and access to the services that my constituents will now face and the extra stress, worry and cost which will fall on patients, families and carers" he said.
Beds at Weavers Croft in Stroud, Colliers Court in Cinderford and Holly House in Gloucester will be transferred to a centre in Cheltenham.
Gloucestershire Partnership NHS Trust claimed that the changes would provide patients with a higher quality of care. But the county council's health overview and scrutiny committee said the closures would badly affect relatives who would have to travel further to visit loved ones.
The Department of Health said that after carefully considering the IRP's review, it would be "difficult to sustain safe services in four inpatient units", recommending that arrangements should be made to facilitate travel and access to Charlton Lane.
The Gloucestershire Partnership NHS Trust announced last year that it would be cutting almost £10m from mental health services in the county.
Forest of Dean MP Mark Harper said he was "disappointed" with the decision.
"I am very concerned about the difficulty of transport and access to the services that my constituents will now face and the extra stress, worry and cost which will fall on patients, families and carers" he said.
Labels:
cinderford,
gloucester,
gloucestershire,
mental health,
NHS cuts,
stroud
Thursday 30 August 2007
Norfolk: Plea to health secretary over Aylsham hospital
Campaigners at Aylsham are calling on health secretary Alan Johnson to overturn a decision to axe their historic hospital.
More than 1,000 people have signed letters asking him to save the 25-bed St Michael's unit which Norfolk's primary care trust recently voted to close by June 2009.
And in a two-pronged attack the town is also set to lobby a county watchdog committee next month which could refuse to ratify the decision.
The letter campaign has been organised by Broadland Liberal Democrats who hope to hand them over to Mr Johnson at Westminster next month.
Lib Dem parliamentary spokeswoman April Pond said closure completely contradicted the government's white paper on health, which clearly stated that patients should be treated closer to home and that community facilities should be kept open where they were wanted and not be closed purely because of lack of funds.
It also flew in the face of local democracy and opinion. It adds: “Norfolk residents don't want to see this hospital closed” and calls on Mr Johnson to “heed their wishes and overturn the decision.”
Signatories had also added their own experiences of the care they had received at St Michael's, their time working there, its history as a war memorial cottage hospital and their fears about the fate of facilities bought through local fund-raising and donations.
“People really feel cheated,” said Mrs Pond. “I have never seen such an enormous outcry about anything.”
Liz Jones, chairman of Aylsham Town Council, said she was not surprised at the response to the letter campaign which had been supported by everyone she came across.
“It's an issue that cuts across party politics. Everyone is so incensed by the whole thing,” she added.
A meeting of the hospital campaign group on Monday would explore ways of lobbying the Norfolk Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee which is expected to debate the PCT board's plans for community bed numbers and hospital closures when it meets on September 27.
If it is unhappy with the trust's decision, it has the power to refer the matter to health secretary Mr Johnson.
Miss Jones hopes that members of the working party, including local GPs, will be allowed to address the committee and plead St Michael's case.
She said: “It is vital that we give it this one last push.”
The Friends of North Walsham's War Memorial Cottage Hospital are urgently appealing for more donations and support following this year's successful campaign to keep the service open.
The group's annual meeting heard continuing vigilance was needed to guard against any possible U-turn by the PCT.
Chairman Brian Elliott and treasurer Brian Blackburn stressed the importance of keeping the public aware of the hospital's situation and the Friends' desperate need for continuing donations so that the group could get back to providing comforts and other items for patients and staff, as it had done in the past.
More than 1,000 people have signed letters asking him to save the 25-bed St Michael's unit which Norfolk's primary care trust recently voted to close by June 2009.
And in a two-pronged attack the town is also set to lobby a county watchdog committee next month which could refuse to ratify the decision.
The letter campaign has been organised by Broadland Liberal Democrats who hope to hand them over to Mr Johnson at Westminster next month.
Lib Dem parliamentary spokeswoman April Pond said closure completely contradicted the government's white paper on health, which clearly stated that patients should be treated closer to home and that community facilities should be kept open where they were wanted and not be closed purely because of lack of funds.
It also flew in the face of local democracy and opinion. It adds: “Norfolk residents don't want to see this hospital closed” and calls on Mr Johnson to “heed their wishes and overturn the decision.”
Signatories had also added their own experiences of the care they had received at St Michael's, their time working there, its history as a war memorial cottage hospital and their fears about the fate of facilities bought through local fund-raising and donations.
“People really feel cheated,” said Mrs Pond. “I have never seen such an enormous outcry about anything.”
Liz Jones, chairman of Aylsham Town Council, said she was not surprised at the response to the letter campaign which had been supported by everyone she came across.
“It's an issue that cuts across party politics. Everyone is so incensed by the whole thing,” she added.
A meeting of the hospital campaign group on Monday would explore ways of lobbying the Norfolk Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee which is expected to debate the PCT board's plans for community bed numbers and hospital closures when it meets on September 27.
If it is unhappy with the trust's decision, it has the power to refer the matter to health secretary Mr Johnson.
Miss Jones hopes that members of the working party, including local GPs, will be allowed to address the committee and plead St Michael's case.
She said: “It is vital that we give it this one last push.”
The Friends of North Walsham's War Memorial Cottage Hospital are urgently appealing for more donations and support following this year's successful campaign to keep the service open.
The group's annual meeting heard continuing vigilance was needed to guard against any possible U-turn by the PCT.
Chairman Brian Elliott and treasurer Brian Blackburn stressed the importance of keeping the public aware of the hospital's situation and the Friends' desperate need for continuing donations so that the group could get back to providing comforts and other items for patients and staff, as it had done in the past.
Suffolk: GPs in budget cut battle
Health centre budget cuts in Suffolk have been criticised by doctors, according to the BBC.
GPs in Haverhill claim they are facing cuts of as much as £300,000 in funding because of a new agreement with Suffolk Primary Care Trust.
The Trust said many of the services provided by doctors can be done more efficiently by pharmacists, nurse practitioners, NHS Direct and others.
Four years ago the health centres were given growth money to help recruit more staff and treat more people, but now they say the cash is being taken away.
The doctors have united and pledged to fight the budget cuts.
Speaking for all the surgeries, Dr Neville Selby said: "It's tremendously demoralising and as a GP you must do your utmost to help the patients you live and work with.
"To have a government organisation telling you that you can't do certain things is downright immoral."
GPs in Haverhill claim they are facing cuts of as much as £300,000 in funding because of a new agreement with Suffolk Primary Care Trust.
The Trust said many of the services provided by doctors can be done more efficiently by pharmacists, nurse practitioners, NHS Direct and others.
Four years ago the health centres were given growth money to help recruit more staff and treat more people, but now they say the cash is being taken away.
The doctors have united and pledged to fight the budget cuts.
Speaking for all the surgeries, Dr Neville Selby said: "It's tremendously demoralising and as a GP you must do your utmost to help the patients you live and work with.
"To have a government organisation telling you that you can't do certain things is downright immoral."
Rossendale: NHS cutbacks bombshell
Hospital campaigners are fearful of the effects NHS cutbacks will have in Rossendale, reports the Manchester Evening News.
Health Secretary Alan Johnson announced the bombshell news last Friday that he was approving the controversial recommendations of the Making it Better and Healthy Futures consultations.
And supporters of the campaign to retain full maternity and Accident and Emergency (A&E) services at both Fairfield Hospital in Bury and Rochdale Infirmary said they were shocked and devastated to lose their appeal.
Under the modernisation, Rochdale's maternity facilities will be downgraded and its A&E demoted to an urgent care centre, effectively leaving it as a cottage hospital.
Meanwhile, Fairfield will lose its maternity services and special care baby unit but keep its A&E facilities. It is predicted the changes will take up to five years to implement.
Former midwife Gladys Sandiford, a Rossendale councillor, was disappointed with the verdict and feared the impact on the Valley.
She said: "I just hope this doesn't lead to any avoidable deaths and that this has shown just how desperately important it is that we get at least an urgent care centre and midwife-led birthing unit in Rossendale."
Councillor Alan Neal said the loss of vital hospital services in Rochdale would have a major impact on those in the eastern end of the Valley
He said: "It's one thing if you have transport, but for those reliant on public transport it's going to have a big impact and my sympathy is with them."
Health Secretary Alan Johnson announced the bombshell news last Friday that he was approving the controversial recommendations of the Making it Better and Healthy Futures consultations.
And supporters of the campaign to retain full maternity and Accident and Emergency (A&E) services at both Fairfield Hospital in Bury and Rochdale Infirmary said they were shocked and devastated to lose their appeal.
Under the modernisation, Rochdale's maternity facilities will be downgraded and its A&E demoted to an urgent care centre, effectively leaving it as a cottage hospital.
Meanwhile, Fairfield will lose its maternity services and special care baby unit but keep its A&E facilities. It is predicted the changes will take up to five years to implement.
Former midwife Gladys Sandiford, a Rossendale councillor, was disappointed with the verdict and feared the impact on the Valley.
She said: "I just hope this doesn't lead to any avoidable deaths and that this has shown just how desperately important it is that we get at least an urgent care centre and midwife-led birthing unit in Rossendale."
Councillor Alan Neal said the loss of vital hospital services in Rochdale would have a major impact on those in the eastern end of the Valley
He said: "It's one thing if you have transport, but for those reliant on public transport it's going to have a big impact and my sympathy is with them."
Tuesday 28 August 2007
Sussex: Public meeting against NHS cuts
Campaigners opposing possible cuts to services at three West Sussex hospitals have attended a public meeting in East Grinstead, the BBC reports.
West Sussex Primary Care Trust wants just one of either Worthing, Haywards Heath or Chichester hospital to have a full range of A&E, emergency surgery and consultant-led maternity services.
Protesters want Haywards Heath services to remain, because they say Worthing and Chichester are "too far away".
John Wilderspin, chief executive of the Trust, said: "The reason that we're looking to centralise some specialist services is we can then ensure we have the expertise available for a greater period of the day."
He said the PCT was proposing to have one major general hospital in West Sussex.
But he added: "We entirely understand that people in East Grinstead may want to go to other places and the ambulance service will take people to the nearest possible large unit if that's what they require.
But town councillor Ginny Waddingham, deputy mayor of East Grinstead, said: "I think this is just a money-saving exercise.
"I think they've got to make cuts. The trouble is these cuts are going to really endanger lives in East Grinstead and that's something we've got to try and prevent.
"The options we're being offered are not good enough.
"It takes us so long to get to Chichester and Worthing. It's not somewhere you would expect to go and have a baby, or be taken in an emergency situation."
West Sussex Primary Care Trust wants just one of either Worthing, Haywards Heath or Chichester hospital to have a full range of A&E, emergency surgery and consultant-led maternity services.
Protesters want Haywards Heath services to remain, because they say Worthing and Chichester are "too far away".
John Wilderspin, chief executive of the Trust, said: "The reason that we're looking to centralise some specialist services is we can then ensure we have the expertise available for a greater period of the day."
He said the PCT was proposing to have one major general hospital in West Sussex.
But he added: "We entirely understand that people in East Grinstead may want to go to other places and the ambulance service will take people to the nearest possible large unit if that's what they require.
But town councillor Ginny Waddingham, deputy mayor of East Grinstead, said: "I think this is just a money-saving exercise.
"I think they've got to make cuts. The trouble is these cuts are going to really endanger lives in East Grinstead and that's something we've got to try and prevent.
"The options we're being offered are not good enough.
"It takes us so long to get to Chichester and Worthing. It's not somewhere you would expect to go and have a baby, or be taken in an emergency situation."
Monday 27 August 2007
London: Vital officers face axe to save money
SOUTH London's crime-ridden estates could get even worse if plans to scrap key police officers are accepted - reports the South London Press.
An official document has revealed the Met is facing a massive cash shortfall.
It means police chiefs across Lambeth, Southwark, Lewisham and Wandsworth are bracing themselves for a series of cutbacks which could cripple services.
One area they have been told they must rein in is spending on crime prevention - with nearly all South London's specialist officers now facing the chop.
The South London Press understands their vital work handing out advice to the public and "designing out crime" on building projects will be taken over by safer neighbourhood teams.
But senior police sources have warned the cutbacks could have "critical implications" for crime prevention across South London.
One said: "Each crime prevention officer [CPO] has developed skills in particular areas of the profession and acts as an unofficial consultant for others who have not got the same amount of knowledge in that aspect of that field.
"Sadly, with the continued expansion of housing and the static size of the number of officers, the importance of well designed new builds is critical. Otherwise I suspect there will be a steady increase in crime."
In a leaked note, the Met's deputy commissioner, Paul Stephenson, warned every borough in the force faces serious challenges ahead.
He said: "Based on current predictions, the Met is facing a shortfall in funding for the next three financial years. Each business group has been asked to offer up a minimum one per cent of their budget as savings.
"The position is challenging. We are required to deliver a balanced budget, deliver efficiency savings to a nationally agreed level, but at the same time meet stretching performance requirements for tackling crime and keeping London safe."
It is believed the minimum one per cent cut represents tens of millions of pounds from each force's budget.
An official document has revealed the Met is facing a massive cash shortfall.
It means police chiefs across Lambeth, Southwark, Lewisham and Wandsworth are bracing themselves for a series of cutbacks which could cripple services.
One area they have been told they must rein in is spending on crime prevention - with nearly all South London's specialist officers now facing the chop.
The South London Press understands their vital work handing out advice to the public and "designing out crime" on building projects will be taken over by safer neighbourhood teams.
But senior police sources have warned the cutbacks could have "critical implications" for crime prevention across South London.
One said: "Each crime prevention officer [CPO] has developed skills in particular areas of the profession and acts as an unofficial consultant for others who have not got the same amount of knowledge in that aspect of that field.
"Sadly, with the continued expansion of housing and the static size of the number of officers, the importance of well designed new builds is critical. Otherwise I suspect there will be a steady increase in crime."
In a leaked note, the Met's deputy commissioner, Paul Stephenson, warned every borough in the force faces serious challenges ahead.
He said: "Based on current predictions, the Met is facing a shortfall in funding for the next three financial years. Each business group has been asked to offer up a minimum one per cent of their budget as savings.
"The position is challenging. We are required to deliver a balanced budget, deliver efficiency savings to a nationally agreed level, but at the same time meet stretching performance requirements for tackling crime and keeping London safe."
It is believed the minimum one per cent cut represents tens of millions of pounds from each force's budget.
Labels:
lambeth,
lewisham,
police,
southwark,
wandsworth
Sunday 26 August 2007
NHS deaths could be halved, say doctors
More than 10,000 people are dying needlessly each year after being denied intensive care treatment, according to senior doctors, reports the Daily Telegraph.
In a letter to the Health Secretary Alan Johnson, the group of 17 eminent anaesthetists warn that many patients are dying after routine surgery because of a failure to identify them as "high-risk" cases.
The result is that they are not monitored closely enough, causing at least 20,000 deaths each year.
The consultants say that the figure could be halved if simple tests to identify high-risk cases were introduced, so that they are transferred to intensive care, and also challenge the health secretary to explain why technology proven to cut deaths is used in only a fraction of NHS operations.
The number of critical care beds devoted to post-operative patients should be tripled from the 30,000 currently provided, while 50% of patients should receive extra care, the doctors say.
One of the co-signatories, David Bennett, Emeritus Professor of Intensive Care Medicine at St George's Hospital in London, said: "There are at least 20,000 patients dying after surgery across the UK - that is a very conservative estimate.
"We think we could halve the numbers dying, and save at least 10,000 lives a year, if patients were given the right support.
"This is a political decision. There aren't many interventions that could have such a dramatic effect."
Prof Bennett said that most hospitals had failed to invest in equipment such as fitness bikes, which help to assess the patient's health prior to surgery, and blood-flow monitors, which maintain fluid levels and cardiac output during an operation.
Despite backing from NHS rationing body the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, blood -flow monitors are used on less than 10% of patients.
Dr Bruce Taylor, honorary secretary of The Intensive Care Society blamed a lack of funds for the situation.
He said more patients should be monitored by intensive care before they became seriously ill. But he said there was "no slack at all in the existing system" to take on more patients without a substantial rise in funds.
Britain has 0.6 critical care beds per 10,000 population compared to 4.4 per 10,000 in the US.
"There are not enough beds and we regularly struggle to meet demand," Dr Taylor said.
A spokesman for the Department of Health said the Government was doing all it could to ensure hospitals provided efficient surgical care.
That's not quite true, of course. Given a lack of funds is being blamed for this situation, "all it could" hardly includes wasting billions of pounds a year on an organisation - the EU - that clearly wastes so much and whose auditors can't tell us how that money is being spent.
If there is no money to improve patient care or cut needless deaths in the ways outlined, then the government should immediately cut back on waste elsewhere.
At least refuse to pay the EU the promised extra money, and perhaps consider cutting back on the multi-billion pound annual contributions we already make.
In a letter to the Health Secretary Alan Johnson, the group of 17 eminent anaesthetists warn that many patients are dying after routine surgery because of a failure to identify them as "high-risk" cases.
The result is that they are not monitored closely enough, causing at least 20,000 deaths each year.
The consultants say that the figure could be halved if simple tests to identify high-risk cases were introduced, so that they are transferred to intensive care, and also challenge the health secretary to explain why technology proven to cut deaths is used in only a fraction of NHS operations.
The number of critical care beds devoted to post-operative patients should be tripled from the 30,000 currently provided, while 50% of patients should receive extra care, the doctors say.
One of the co-signatories, David Bennett, Emeritus Professor of Intensive Care Medicine at St George's Hospital in London, said: "There are at least 20,000 patients dying after surgery across the UK - that is a very conservative estimate.
"We think we could halve the numbers dying, and save at least 10,000 lives a year, if patients were given the right support.
"This is a political decision. There aren't many interventions that could have such a dramatic effect."
Prof Bennett said that most hospitals had failed to invest in equipment such as fitness bikes, which help to assess the patient's health prior to surgery, and blood-flow monitors, which maintain fluid levels and cardiac output during an operation.
Despite backing from NHS rationing body the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, blood -flow monitors are used on less than 10% of patients.
Dr Bruce Taylor, honorary secretary of The Intensive Care Society blamed a lack of funds for the situation.
He said more patients should be monitored by intensive care before they became seriously ill. But he said there was "no slack at all in the existing system" to take on more patients without a substantial rise in funds.
Britain has 0.6 critical care beds per 10,000 population compared to 4.4 per 10,000 in the US.
"There are not enough beds and we regularly struggle to meet demand," Dr Taylor said.
A spokesman for the Department of Health said the Government was doing all it could to ensure hospitals provided efficient surgical care.
That's not quite true, of course. Given a lack of funds is being blamed for this situation, "all it could" hardly includes wasting billions of pounds a year on an organisation - the EU - that clearly wastes so much and whose auditors can't tell us how that money is being spent.
If there is no money to improve patient care or cut needless deaths in the ways outlined, then the government should immediately cut back on waste elsewhere.
At least refuse to pay the EU the promised extra money, and perhaps consider cutting back on the multi-billion pound annual contributions we already make.
Saturday 25 August 2007
Four maternity units to be shut for a service led by midwives
Plans to close "vital" hospital services in Greater Manchester that have been newly approved by the Health Secretary have been slammed by a local MP as likely to "cost lives" - reports The Times.
A review of NHS services ended yesterday with Alan Johnson’s endorsement of an independent panel’s recommendation to close maternity units at Fairfield in Bury, Rochdale Infirmary, Trafford and Salford Hope.
Salford will also lose its neonatal intensive-care unit.
The Independent Reconfiguration Panel has also backed plans to down-grade Rochdale’s A&E unit and end emergency surgery at Fairfield Hospital.
The changes are expected to happen within five years and are likely to mean more home births and deliveries in units staffed by midwives.
Paul Rowen, the Liberal Democrat MP for Rochdale, accused Mr Johnson yesterday of “wielding the axe” in Greater Manchester to cut costs.
Tens of thousands of people had signed a petition against the closure of the hospital’s maternity unit, he said. “I am furious that we have been ignored.”
The panel said that local NHS trusts should 'consider' creating stand-alone midwife-led units at Bury, Salford and Trafford. But the Royal College of Midwives said that midwifery staff might not cope with the work demands.
Ministers defended the changes. Hazel Blears, the Communities Secretary and MP for Salford, perversely said that she was “very pleased” that her constituency was in line to have a stand-alone midwife-led unit, preferring to cling to that dim prospect while ignoring the fact that the unit at Salford Hope hospital will be shut down.
Back in December Ms Blears joined picket lines to protest over proposals to close that maternity unit at Hope Hospital, despite supporting the national policy on maternity changes. Yet now the axe has fallen, she appears to be welcoming the closure as good news.
“As a local MP I have made representations at every stage to ensure that babies can still be born in Salford, and this is still the case.” she said.
Certainly babies will "still be born", Ms Blears. The question is, what kind of care will they get as a result of these cutbacks?
A review of NHS services ended yesterday with Alan Johnson’s endorsement of an independent panel’s recommendation to close maternity units at Fairfield in Bury, Rochdale Infirmary, Trafford and Salford Hope.
Salford will also lose its neonatal intensive-care unit.
The Independent Reconfiguration Panel has also backed plans to down-grade Rochdale’s A&E unit and end emergency surgery at Fairfield Hospital.
The changes are expected to happen within five years and are likely to mean more home births and deliveries in units staffed by midwives.
Paul Rowen, the Liberal Democrat MP for Rochdale, accused Mr Johnson yesterday of “wielding the axe” in Greater Manchester to cut costs.
Tens of thousands of people had signed a petition against the closure of the hospital’s maternity unit, he said. “I am furious that we have been ignored.”
The panel said that local NHS trusts should 'consider' creating stand-alone midwife-led units at Bury, Salford and Trafford. But the Royal College of Midwives said that midwifery staff might not cope with the work demands.
Ministers defended the changes. Hazel Blears, the Communities Secretary and MP for Salford, perversely said that she was “very pleased” that her constituency was in line to have a stand-alone midwife-led unit, preferring to cling to that dim prospect while ignoring the fact that the unit at Salford Hope hospital will be shut down.
Back in December Ms Blears joined picket lines to protest over proposals to close that maternity unit at Hope Hospital, despite supporting the national policy on maternity changes. Yet now the axe has fallen, she appears to be welcoming the closure as good news.
“As a local MP I have made representations at every stage to ensure that babies can still be born in Salford, and this is still the case.” she said.
Certainly babies will "still be born", Ms Blears. The question is, what kind of care will they get as a result of these cutbacks?
Manchester: Hospital closures and cuts 'will cost lives'
Plans to downgrade A&E and maternity services in Greater Manchester were approved yesterday amid claims the changes will cost lives - reports the Daily Telegraph.
Under the plans approved yesterday by an independent panel and Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, Rochdale Hospital's maternity and in-patient paediatrics services will close.
Its A&E will be downgraded to an urgent care centre and emergency surgery will be moved out.
Tens of thousands of people signed a petition against the closure of the maternity unit.
Fairfield Hospital in Bury will lose its maternity service, inpatient paediatrics and emergency surgery although A&E will remain.
In Salford, maternity and inpatient paediatrics services at Hope Hospital will close and its neonatal intensive care unit will move to the Royal Bolton Hospital. Trafford Hospital will lose its maternity services and inpatient paediatrics.
Managers say the changes will ensure patients are treated safely, but Paul Rowen, the Liberal Democrat MP for Rochdale, accused Mr Johnson of "wielding the axe" in Greater Manchester.
"The Labour Government ought to be ashamed of themselves. This decision by Mr Johnson will cost lives," he said.
Hazel Blears, the communities secretary and Salford MP, said she was "pleased" by the recommendation that Salford should have a stand-alone midwife-led unit.
In December, she was accused of hypocrisy after joining picket lines to protest over the proposals.
Under the plans approved yesterday by an independent panel and Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, Rochdale Hospital's maternity and in-patient paediatrics services will close.
Its A&E will be downgraded to an urgent care centre and emergency surgery will be moved out.
Tens of thousands of people signed a petition against the closure of the maternity unit.
Fairfield Hospital in Bury will lose its maternity service, inpatient paediatrics and emergency surgery although A&E will remain.
In Salford, maternity and inpatient paediatrics services at Hope Hospital will close and its neonatal intensive care unit will move to the Royal Bolton Hospital. Trafford Hospital will lose its maternity services and inpatient paediatrics.
Managers say the changes will ensure patients are treated safely, but Paul Rowen, the Liberal Democrat MP for Rochdale, accused Mr Johnson of "wielding the axe" in Greater Manchester.
"The Labour Government ought to be ashamed of themselves. This decision by Mr Johnson will cost lives," he said.
Hazel Blears, the communities secretary and Salford MP, said she was "pleased" by the recommendation that Salford should have a stand-alone midwife-led unit.
In December, she was accused of hypocrisy after joining picket lines to protest over the proposals.
Labels:
hospitals,
manchester,
NHS cuts,
rochdale,
salford
Manchester: Midwives 'dismayed' at fewer units
Midwives have condemned the decision to cut maternity and children's care from 12 to eight hospitals in Greater Manchester and challenged health chiefs to reveal exact bed numbers - reports the Manchester Evening News.
Senior figures in the Royal College of Midwives are "dismayed' by the plans, which will mean babies will only continue to be born in hospitals in Trafford, Salford, Bury and Rochdale after 2011 if health chiefs decide to set up stand alone midwife-led units.
The RCM claim health chiefs `got their sums wrong.' Politicians in Bury, Trafford and Salford have also reacted angrily to the cuts.
But health chiefs defended the plans, saying they would create more beds and improve safety. There were no exact bed numbers available.
Dr Maria Barrell, director of the Royal College of Midwives, said she was speaking out against the plan to protect women's safety.
She said: "I am very concerned that the reduced capacity of Greater Manchester's maternity units will not be able to cope with the demand of an increasing birth rate.
"Midwives are already struggling to provide the quality of care that patients expect and deserve. The government says that extra investment will compensate for the closures, but it seems to me they're got their sums wrong."
Leila Williams, director of the Children, Young People and Families Network, the organisation behind the maternity review, said: "There will be more beds after these plans are brought in. The whole point of Making It Better was to improve the safety for women and children's services across the region."
Health bosses in Bury, Salford and Trafford are now considering the option of midwife-led units.
Edna Robinson, the chief executive of Trafford Healthcare, said: "We are obviously still disappointed that our services will alter. However we do still understand and support the principles of the changes.
"We are very excited by the prospect of establishing a Birth Centre at Trafford General."
Margaret Morris, Chairman of Salford Royal, said: "We are bitterly disappointed with this news.
"We have a track record in delivering high quality care through our maternity and neonatal services."
Coun Yvonne Creswell deputy leader of Bury Council said: "The decision to downgrade the maternity unit is devastating for all those people who fought so hard to keep it open.
"It will deny thousands of Bury resident's access to local maternity services and is nothing short of betrayal."
Senior figures in the Royal College of Midwives are "dismayed' by the plans, which will mean babies will only continue to be born in hospitals in Trafford, Salford, Bury and Rochdale after 2011 if health chiefs decide to set up stand alone midwife-led units.
The RCM claim health chiefs `got their sums wrong.' Politicians in Bury, Trafford and Salford have also reacted angrily to the cuts.
But health chiefs defended the plans, saying they would create more beds and improve safety. There were no exact bed numbers available.
Dr Maria Barrell, director of the Royal College of Midwives, said she was speaking out against the plan to protect women's safety.
She said: "I am very concerned that the reduced capacity of Greater Manchester's maternity units will not be able to cope with the demand of an increasing birth rate.
"Midwives are already struggling to provide the quality of care that patients expect and deserve. The government says that extra investment will compensate for the closures, but it seems to me they're got their sums wrong."
Leila Williams, director of the Children, Young People and Families Network, the organisation behind the maternity review, said: "There will be more beds after these plans are brought in. The whole point of Making It Better was to improve the safety for women and children's services across the region."
Health bosses in Bury, Salford and Trafford are now considering the option of midwife-led units.
Edna Robinson, the chief executive of Trafford Healthcare, said: "We are obviously still disappointed that our services will alter. However we do still understand and support the principles of the changes.
"We are very excited by the prospect of establishing a Birth Centre at Trafford General."
Margaret Morris, Chairman of Salford Royal, said: "We are bitterly disappointed with this news.
"We have a track record in delivering high quality care through our maternity and neonatal services."
Coun Yvonne Creswell deputy leader of Bury Council said: "The decision to downgrade the maternity unit is devastating for all those people who fought so hard to keep it open.
"It will deny thousands of Bury resident's access to local maternity services and is nothing short of betrayal."
Friday 24 August 2007
New nurses left jobless by budget squeeze
Thousands of newly qualified nurses are facing unemployment because of hospital cutbacks, with vacancies at their lowest for 10 years - reports the Daily Telegraph.
New NHS Vacancy survey figures have revealed how difficult it is for nurses, physiotherapists, scientists and doctors to find jobs.
The highest vacancy rate was among consultants, with 1.2% of jobs empty compared with 0.4% in trainee nursing.
There are currently 5,000 newly qualified nurses who cannot find a job and half of the 2,413 newly qualified physiotherapists have not found permanent posts.
More than 20,000 jobs have been cut in recent years as managers struggle to bring NHS finances back into balance.
Dr Peter Carter, the general secretary of the Royal College of Nursing, said: "This is not a 'good news' story for nurses.
''Vacancy rates appear to have reached their lowest levels for years but we fear that has been achieved only by widespread freezing and deleting of posts by NHS trusts desperate to balance the books.
"Thousands of newly qualified nurses - costing taxpayers millions of pounds to train - cannot find jobs this year yet at the same time the workload on the wards and in the community remains high.
"It's time for the Government to put in place a long-term workforce strategy that prevents the feast or famine characteristic of the NHS job market in recent years."
New NHS Vacancy survey figures have revealed how difficult it is for nurses, physiotherapists, scientists and doctors to find jobs.
The highest vacancy rate was among consultants, with 1.2% of jobs empty compared with 0.4% in trainee nursing.
There are currently 5,000 newly qualified nurses who cannot find a job and half of the 2,413 newly qualified physiotherapists have not found permanent posts.
More than 20,000 jobs have been cut in recent years as managers struggle to bring NHS finances back into balance.
Dr Peter Carter, the general secretary of the Royal College of Nursing, said: "This is not a 'good news' story for nurses.
''Vacancy rates appear to have reached their lowest levels for years but we fear that has been achieved only by widespread freezing and deleting of posts by NHS trusts desperate to balance the books.
"Thousands of newly qualified nurses - costing taxpayers millions of pounds to train - cannot find jobs this year yet at the same time the workload on the wards and in the community remains high.
"It's time for the Government to put in place a long-term workforce strategy that prevents the feast or famine characteristic of the NHS job market in recent years."
Wednesday 22 August 2007
Burnley: Leader protests over A&E closure
A council leader is holding an all-day protest outside Burnley General Hospital over plans for NHS cuts, reports the BBC.
Gordon Birtwistle is campaigning against proposals to downgrade the casualty department and send emergency patients to Blackburn.
He started his protest outside the gates on Casterton Avenue at 0800 BST and will finish 12 hours later.
The NHS trust has claimed that the plans were to meet the changing needs of patients and would offer a higher quality service.
A spokesperson from East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust said: "The Accident and Emergency Department will change to become an Urgent Care Centre, open 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
"The Urgent Care Centre will still see and treat almost 9 out of 10 people.
"Only serious cases will actually go to Royal Blackburn Hospital - which amount to 13% of cases."
Gordon Birtwistle is campaigning against proposals to downgrade the casualty department and send emergency patients to Blackburn.
He started his protest outside the gates on Casterton Avenue at 0800 BST and will finish 12 hours later.
The NHS trust has claimed that the plans were to meet the changing needs of patients and would offer a higher quality service.
A spokesperson from East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust said: "The Accident and Emergency Department will change to become an Urgent Care Centre, open 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
"The Urgent Care Centre will still see and treat almost 9 out of 10 people.
"Only serious cases will actually go to Royal Blackburn Hospital - which amount to 13% of cases."
Tuesday 21 August 2007
Study 'backs' couple's A&E fight
A couple's court battle to try and keep Rochdale Infirmary's A&E department open has been vindicated by a new study, their solicitor has claimed - according to the BBC.
University researchers have found the further patients travel to hospital, the more likely they are to die.
David and Lisa-Louise Fitton say they need an A&E department close to their home because their son suffers fits. Solicitor Richard Scorer said the couple used a similar argument in their application for a judicial review.
Researchers from the University of Sheffield said their data suggested longer journeys to hospital for seriously ill patients could lead to an increase in mortality.
They argue the study proves more research was needed into government plans to downgrade many A&E departments across the country in favour of regional super units.
Rochdale is among the hospitals set to have its department downgraded to an 'urgent care centre', leaving Jordan facing a 25-minute journey to an A&E department.
University researchers have found the further patients travel to hospital, the more likely they are to die.
David and Lisa-Louise Fitton say they need an A&E department close to their home because their son suffers fits. Solicitor Richard Scorer said the couple used a similar argument in their application for a judicial review.
Researchers from the University of Sheffield said their data suggested longer journeys to hospital for seriously ill patients could lead to an increase in mortality.
They argue the study proves more research was needed into government plans to downgrade many A&E departments across the country in favour of regional super units.
Rochdale is among the hospitals set to have its department downgraded to an 'urgent care centre', leaving Jordan facing a 25-minute journey to an A&E department.
Hospital downgrades 'could kill thousands'
Thousands of patients could die as a result of the Government's policy to downgrade accident and emergency departments, the Daily Telegraph reports today.
A new report has found that the further patients travel in an ambulance to reach hospital the more likely they are to die, showing that mortality rates increase by one percent for every extra 6 miles travelled.
The report has been published by Sheffield University, which studied more than 10,000 emergency calls to ambulance services in Berkshire, Derbyshire, Essex and the West Midlands.
The Government policy of closing local A&E departments outlined in a White Paper in January 2006, which many see to be more about cost-cutting than improving services, has provoked protests amid fears people will have to travel further for emergency treatment.
Many people cannot understand why A&E departments are under threat of closure when they are perpetually busy and admissions have increased.
The report comes as other studies reveal negative developments in health services.
A report ranked England among the worst in Europe for cancer survival rates, research in the British Medical Journal showed that junior doctors were not receiving the training they needed to provide high quality care in the future and thousands of nurses faced unemployment due to a lack of jobs.
A new report has found that the further patients travel in an ambulance to reach hospital the more likely they are to die, showing that mortality rates increase by one percent for every extra 6 miles travelled.
The report has been published by Sheffield University, which studied more than 10,000 emergency calls to ambulance services in Berkshire, Derbyshire, Essex and the West Midlands.
The Government policy of closing local A&E departments outlined in a White Paper in January 2006, which many see to be more about cost-cutting than improving services, has provoked protests amid fears people will have to travel further for emergency treatment.
Many people cannot understand why A&E departments are under threat of closure when they are perpetually busy and admissions have increased.
The report comes as other studies reveal negative developments in health services.
A report ranked England among the worst in Europe for cancer survival rates, research in the British Medical Journal showed that junior doctors were not receiving the training they needed to provide high quality care in the future and thousands of nurses faced unemployment due to a lack of jobs.
Southwark: Ex-nurse warns over clinic closure
A former nurse has spoken out to defend a vital mental health clinic threatened with closure - reports icSouthLondon.
Ian Rawlins damned proposals to close the Felix Post Unit (FPU), which is a centre used by the elderly.
Mr Rawlins has spent 25 years working in the NHS, the past five as an associate nurse in the clinic in the Maudsley Hospital, Denmark Hill.
He left earlier this year and says he is appalled at moves to close the FPU.
"It's time to stand up," he said. "This would have a severe impact on these people, on their families and on their communities. I was shocked to hear a senior manager at one meeting talk about 'through-put' - getting people in and out as quickly as possible without trying to look at the whole person. He may as well have called it 'conveyor belt care'."
"There are always other factors with one of our patients - physical things, family things, social problems. It's more than just their mental health."
He believes if the service is scrapped patients with physical or social problems will stop getting the joined-up care they need.
The FPU works as a drop-in centre which sees around 30 people a day.
Elderly patients can get help on the spot for mental health problems and advice on anything else they need.
Southwark Pensioners Action Group (SPAG) and Southwark Mind have both responded angrily to plans to cut or close the centre.
But South london and Maudsley NHS Trust (SLaM) said a consultation on the future of the FPU and day-care services across Lambeth and Southwark was planned for later in the year.
If closed, the FPU would be the second unit closed by SLaM in a year,after the Maudsley's 24-hour emergency clinic was shut to patients in May.
Campaigners are fighting to over-turn that decision. North Southwark and Bermondsey MP Simon Hughes recently submitted a 5,000-signature petition calling for it to be reopened.
Ian Rawlins damned proposals to close the Felix Post Unit (FPU), which is a centre used by the elderly.
Mr Rawlins has spent 25 years working in the NHS, the past five as an associate nurse in the clinic in the Maudsley Hospital, Denmark Hill.
He left earlier this year and says he is appalled at moves to close the FPU.
"It's time to stand up," he said. "This would have a severe impact on these people, on their families and on their communities. I was shocked to hear a senior manager at one meeting talk about 'through-put' - getting people in and out as quickly as possible without trying to look at the whole person. He may as well have called it 'conveyor belt care'."
"There are always other factors with one of our patients - physical things, family things, social problems. It's more than just their mental health."
He believes if the service is scrapped patients with physical or social problems will stop getting the joined-up care they need.
The FPU works as a drop-in centre which sees around 30 people a day.
Elderly patients can get help on the spot for mental health problems and advice on anything else they need.
Southwark Pensioners Action Group (SPAG) and Southwark Mind have both responded angrily to plans to cut or close the centre.
But South london and Maudsley NHS Trust (SLaM) said a consultation on the future of the FPU and day-care services across Lambeth and Southwark was planned for later in the year.
If closed, the FPU would be the second unit closed by SLaM in a year,after the Maudsley's 24-hour emergency clinic was shut to patients in May.
Campaigners are fighting to over-turn that decision. North Southwark and Bermondsey MP Simon Hughes recently submitted a 5,000-signature petition calling for it to be reopened.
Monday 20 August 2007
No-confidence vote in NHS board
A vote of no confidence in an NHS trust which has proposed cuts to maternity and paediatric services has been passed by a council in Surrey - reports the BBC.
The leaders of Mole Valley Council's three political groups have issued a statement calling on the board of the trust to reconsider its position.
Epsom and St Helier NHS claim the plans would make services safer for patients.
A spokeswoman said that reasons for the changes included the reduction of doctor's hours under the European Working Time Directive, and medical advances which meant doctors and nurses were becoming more specialised.
"These pressures are not unique to this trust - they are occurring across the country," the spokeswoman said.
Under the proposals, all doctor-led births and overnight paediatric services could be centralised at St Helier Hospital, in nearby Carshalton, with Epsom retaining pre-natal and post-natal care and a children's assessment unit.
But the statement from Mole Valley District Council said: "This council is deeply concerned at the proposals to remove maternity and paediatric services from Epsom hospital into London.
"It has no confidence in the board of the Epsom and St Helier University Trust to resist pressure caused by the appalling financial position of the South East NHS and the policies of the strategic health authority and government.
"It calls on the board to reconsider their position and to maintain accessible services for the residents of Mole Valley and the rest of the Mid Surrey area presently covered by Epsom hospital."
The NHS trust said a formal consultation would take place before any decisions were made.
The leaders of Mole Valley Council's three political groups have issued a statement calling on the board of the trust to reconsider its position.
Epsom and St Helier NHS claim the plans would make services safer for patients.
A spokeswoman said that reasons for the changes included the reduction of doctor's hours under the European Working Time Directive, and medical advances which meant doctors and nurses were becoming more specialised.
"These pressures are not unique to this trust - they are occurring across the country," the spokeswoman said.
Under the proposals, all doctor-led births and overnight paediatric services could be centralised at St Helier Hospital, in nearby Carshalton, with Epsom retaining pre-natal and post-natal care and a children's assessment unit.
But the statement from Mole Valley District Council said: "This council is deeply concerned at the proposals to remove maternity and paediatric services from Epsom hospital into London.
"It has no confidence in the board of the Epsom and St Helier University Trust to resist pressure caused by the appalling financial position of the South East NHS and the policies of the strategic health authority and government.
"It calls on the board to reconsider their position and to maintain accessible services for the residents of Mole Valley and the rest of the Mid Surrey area presently covered by Epsom hospital."
The NHS trust said a formal consultation would take place before any decisions were made.
Sunday 19 August 2007
Foot-care failure 'causes misery'
Older people are being left housebound and disabled by a lack of NHS foot-care services in England, Age Concern says.
It cites Office of National Statistics figures from 2001 suggesting a third of over-65s cannot cut their own toe-nails and struggle to access NHS services.
Some are even trying to cut their nails with gardening shears, the charity said as it launched a campaign on the issue.
The Department of Health said they expected the NHS to provide good chiropody services for the elderly.
People may need to see a chiropodist because of problems with poor circulation, ulcers or overlapping toes.
Older people may also need help with basic foot care such as nail cutting and foot hygiene because they can no longer reach their own toe-nails.
Launching their Feet for Purpose campaign, Age Concern said older people were being put on long waiting lists forcing them to pay privately or rely on services provided by the charity.
It said an NHS report showed that between 1996 and 2005, there was a 20% drop in new episodes of care in NHS chiropody.
In some areas people have no access to foot-care services on the NHS, Age Concern said.
Lack of even the most basic foot care puts the elderly at risk of complications that lead to dangerous falls, severe restrictions on mobility and social isolation.
Age Concern director general Gordon Lishman said as well as cases of people cutting their nails with gardening shears, people had also resorted to kicking solid walls in their bare feet to break their nails.
"Foot-care services should be free and universally available to those who need them - yet increasingly in many parts of England they are being restricted or withdrawn."
He called for the Department of Health to include chiropody in the NHS maximum waiting time target of 18 weeks.
Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists chairman Janet McInnes said if older people were able to stay physically active they placed less of a burden on other parts of the health service.
"The SCP, along with other organisations, has highlighted again and again the impact of a lack of investment in foot health treatment for older people," she said.
"The importance of good foot health in maintaining older people's independence, mobility and social contact cannot be overstated."
It cites Office of National Statistics figures from 2001 suggesting a third of over-65s cannot cut their own toe-nails and struggle to access NHS services.
Some are even trying to cut their nails with gardening shears, the charity said as it launched a campaign on the issue.
The Department of Health said they expected the NHS to provide good chiropody services for the elderly.
People may need to see a chiropodist because of problems with poor circulation, ulcers or overlapping toes.
Older people may also need help with basic foot care such as nail cutting and foot hygiene because they can no longer reach their own toe-nails.
Launching their Feet for Purpose campaign, Age Concern said older people were being put on long waiting lists forcing them to pay privately or rely on services provided by the charity.
It said an NHS report showed that between 1996 and 2005, there was a 20% drop in new episodes of care in NHS chiropody.
In some areas people have no access to foot-care services on the NHS, Age Concern said.
Lack of even the most basic foot care puts the elderly at risk of complications that lead to dangerous falls, severe restrictions on mobility and social isolation.
Age Concern director general Gordon Lishman said as well as cases of people cutting their nails with gardening shears, people had also resorted to kicking solid walls in their bare feet to break their nails.
"Foot-care services should be free and universally available to those who need them - yet increasingly in many parts of England they are being restricted or withdrawn."
He called for the Department of Health to include chiropody in the NHS maximum waiting time target of 18 weeks.
Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists chairman Janet McInnes said if older people were able to stay physically active they placed less of a burden on other parts of the health service.
"The SCP, along with other organisations, has highlighted again and again the impact of a lack of investment in foot health treatment for older people," she said.
"The importance of good foot health in maintaining older people's independence, mobility and social contact cannot be overstated."
Labels:
elderly care,
foor care services,
NHS cuts
Wednesday 15 August 2007
Rail fares to rise as Treasury cuts subsidies
Train passengers are facing another set of fare increases after the Government intensified its financial squeeze on the rail industry, reports the Daily Telegraph.
Weeks after ministers said that passengers would pick up a still bigger share of the bill for improvements to the network, the keys to the profitable East Coast Main Line were handed over to National Express.
Its bid will see unregulated fares – such as walk on off peak tickets – rise by 2.1% above inflation over the period of the franchise up until March 2015.
According to Passenger Focus, the consumer watchdog group, this could see fares increase by 45% over the next eight years with, for example, a York to London open return rising from £179 to £259.
"We are extremely concerned about this," said Anthony Smith, the group's chief executive.
"The fact is that this figure is just an average and they will play around with fares to manage capacity. I think there will be some eye-watering rises on walk on fares."
Underpinning passenger fears is the willingness of National Express to pay £1.4 billion to the Treasury over the next eight years – compared to the £1.3 billion GNER, which was forced to surrender the franchise, was prepared to pay over a decade.
The bid reflected a recent trend in franchises where the Government has been keen to cut subsidies to the industry.
In some cases grants to operators are gradually being replaced by premiums which have to be handed over to the Treasury.
This has already led to some startling fare rises under the new batch of franchises, with South West Trains hiking up some tickets by around 20% and Arriva imposing increases of 30% on some of its cheapest fares.
According to the Department for Transport the new franchise will include provision for new services such as a train every half an hour to Leeds.
Other enhancements outlined by the Government included 14,000 extra carriages from 2010.
But Mr Smith questioned whether this was a firm commitment or merely an "aspiration".
Gerry Doherty, general secretary of the white collar rail union, TSSA, questioned how the new company could raise the cash.
"This is the economics of the madhouse and it seems to us that passengers are being fleeced for the duel purpose of filling the coffers of the government and lining the pockets of shareholders.
"Are they really saying that companies have the right to charge what they like, how will that get people out of their cars and off planes?"
Weeks after ministers said that passengers would pick up a still bigger share of the bill for improvements to the network, the keys to the profitable East Coast Main Line were handed over to National Express.
Its bid will see unregulated fares – such as walk on off peak tickets – rise by 2.1% above inflation over the period of the franchise up until March 2015.
According to Passenger Focus, the consumer watchdog group, this could see fares increase by 45% over the next eight years with, for example, a York to London open return rising from £179 to £259.
"We are extremely concerned about this," said Anthony Smith, the group's chief executive.
"The fact is that this figure is just an average and they will play around with fares to manage capacity. I think there will be some eye-watering rises on walk on fares."
Underpinning passenger fears is the willingness of National Express to pay £1.4 billion to the Treasury over the next eight years – compared to the £1.3 billion GNER, which was forced to surrender the franchise, was prepared to pay over a decade.
The bid reflected a recent trend in franchises where the Government has been keen to cut subsidies to the industry.
In some cases grants to operators are gradually being replaced by premiums which have to be handed over to the Treasury.
This has already led to some startling fare rises under the new batch of franchises, with South West Trains hiking up some tickets by around 20% and Arriva imposing increases of 30% on some of its cheapest fares.
According to the Department for Transport the new franchise will include provision for new services such as a train every half an hour to Leeds.
Other enhancements outlined by the Government included 14,000 extra carriages from 2010.
But Mr Smith questioned whether this was a firm commitment or merely an "aspiration".
Gerry Doherty, general secretary of the white collar rail union, TSSA, questioned how the new company could raise the cash.
"This is the economics of the madhouse and it seems to us that passengers are being fleeced for the duel purpose of filling the coffers of the government and lining the pockets of shareholders.
"Are they really saying that companies have the right to charge what they like, how will that get people out of their cars and off planes?"
Tuesday 14 August 2007
Lewisham: Plea over service cuts for old folk
Community groups are campaigning to raise awareness of potential cuts to elderly and disabled people's services - reports the South London Press.
Lewisham council could slash adult social care services for people assessed as having substantial needs.
A consultation period for the changes has been extended by a month to September 15.
Lewisham Mencap and Age Concern Lewisham are pleading with people to make their views known.
Both charities believe if the cuts go ahead their clients' conditions may worsen, and that many people probably don't know what is being considered by the council.
Nick O'Shea, of Lewisham Mencap, said: "We have been rallying parents, holding meetings and getting people to fill out the consultation forms.
Lewisham council is considering three options, including only providing non-residential adult social care to those with "critical" and "greater substantial" needs.
It is believed if the cuts go ahead it will affect 580 people and save the council around £1.6million.
Chris Lunn, of Age Concern Lewisham, said: "We recognise the council has to make decisions but we want to present the case for older people as strongly as possible.
"We are asking people to really consider how this will impact on themselves, their family and those who already need these services.
"There is a lot of evidence that shows people in these circumstances get worse quickly without help and end up needing intensive and very expensive services instead."
Lewisham council could slash adult social care services for people assessed as having substantial needs.
A consultation period for the changes has been extended by a month to September 15.
Lewisham Mencap and Age Concern Lewisham are pleading with people to make their views known.
Both charities believe if the cuts go ahead their clients' conditions may worsen, and that many people probably don't know what is being considered by the council.
Nick O'Shea, of Lewisham Mencap, said: "We have been rallying parents, holding meetings and getting people to fill out the consultation forms.
Lewisham council is considering three options, including only providing non-residential adult social care to those with "critical" and "greater substantial" needs.
It is believed if the cuts go ahead it will affect 580 people and save the council around £1.6million.
Chris Lunn, of Age Concern Lewisham, said: "We recognise the council has to make decisions but we want to present the case for older people as strongly as possible.
"We are asking people to really consider how this will impact on themselves, their family and those who already need these services.
"There is a lot of evidence that shows people in these circumstances get worse quickly without help and end up needing intensive and very expensive services instead."
Labels:
elderly care,
lewisham,
social services
Alzheimer's drug ban to stay, court rules
Alzheimer's victims in England and Wales suffered a blow yesterday when the courts ruled that they would not be prescribed drugs that could ease their suffering - reports the Daily Telegraph.
Campaigners branded the decision "morally reprehensible" after a High Court judge upheld the decision by the drug's rationing body, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), to ban three new drugs; Aricept, Reminyl and Exelon.
NICE ruled that only those with severe Alzheimer's could have them. The drugs, which cost £2.50 per patient per day, can slow the disease.
Harriet Millward, the deputy chief executive of the Alzheimer's Research Trust, said: "We are devastated that these drugs will remain unavailable on the NHS to people with early-stage Alzheimer's. We need to do more research, but it is hugely underfunded."
Gordon Lishman, the director general of Age Concern, said: "People with dementia will have to get much worse before they receive help."
NICE has refused to reveal how it calculated whether these drugs were cost effective in cases of mild Alzheimer's.
The ruling comes after Ivan Lewis, the health and social care minister, admitted that the NHS was failing the 600,000 patients with dementia.
While Ivan Lewis recognises the problem, clearly the necessary funds just aren't available to tackle it - for example by offering clinically effective new drugs like these on the NHS.
So in this context how is it justifiable to reward the audit-failing EU with a 63% rise in payments - handing over £2.5bn extra year (net) on top of the £3.5bn we already pay?
Who needs that money the most - Alzheimer's sufferers or Brussels? And why aren't minsters - and even some MPs no doubt with Alzheimer's sufferers and their families among their own constituents - being more responsible with the finite 'pot' of public money?
Campaigners branded the decision "morally reprehensible" after a High Court judge upheld the decision by the drug's rationing body, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), to ban three new drugs; Aricept, Reminyl and Exelon.
NICE ruled that only those with severe Alzheimer's could have them. The drugs, which cost £2.50 per patient per day, can slow the disease.
Harriet Millward, the deputy chief executive of the Alzheimer's Research Trust, said: "We are devastated that these drugs will remain unavailable on the NHS to people with early-stage Alzheimer's. We need to do more research, but it is hugely underfunded."
Gordon Lishman, the director general of Age Concern, said: "People with dementia will have to get much worse before they receive help."
NICE has refused to reveal how it calculated whether these drugs were cost effective in cases of mild Alzheimer's.
The ruling comes after Ivan Lewis, the health and social care minister, admitted that the NHS was failing the 600,000 patients with dementia.
While Ivan Lewis recognises the problem, clearly the necessary funds just aren't available to tackle it - for example by offering clinically effective new drugs like these on the NHS.
So in this context how is it justifiable to reward the audit-failing EU with a 63% rise in payments - handing over £2.5bn extra year (net) on top of the £3.5bn we already pay?
Who needs that money the most - Alzheimer's sufferers or Brussels? And why aren't minsters - and even some MPs no doubt with Alzheimer's sufferers and their families among their own constituents - being more responsible with the finite 'pot' of public money?
Elderly 'suffering mental health pandemic'
Britain's elderly are in the grip of a mental health crisis with more than 3.5 million older people suffering depression or dementia, according to a new study reported in the Daily Telegraph.
The new figures show the scale of mental health problems in the over-65s is far greater than previously thought.
Experts warn unless prompt Government action is taken the number of those suffering mental health problems will rise by a third in the next 15 years.
The disturbing analysis is released today by the UK Inquiry into Mental Health and Well-Being in Later Life, involving experts from the London School of Economics, the Royal College of Nursing and the charity Age Concern.
According to the study, up to 2.6 million older people - one in four of those over 65 and two in five of those over 85 - are suffering from depression or serious symptoms of depression. Meanwhile, one in five people over 80 suffers from dementia.
Describing it as a "mental health pandemic", the report claims that these are the "invisible" people whose problems are often caused by loneliness, long-term illness and lack of independence.
Many avoid seeking help because of a perceived stigma. Those that do seek help often receive inferior treatment and have their symptoms put down to age.
The inquiry calls for a Government task force to be set up by 2008 to tackle the problem.
"There is no time to waste. As our population ages, we must ensure that the number of older people who suffer mental health problems are minimised," the report says.
"The majority of older people with mental health problems do not receive services. We need to shift our attention to them, to ensure they are supported by loved ones and enabled to care for themselves - by design, not by accident or neglect."
The study predicts that unless there are effective interventions, 3.5 million older people will have symptoms of depression and almost one million will have dementia by 2021.
It states that the Department of Health framework for mental health services has so far focused only on people up to 65.
Those over that age receive lower-cost and inferior services to younger people, even if they have the same condition.
Dr June Crown, the chairman of the inquiry said: "Mental health problems in later life are often preventable and treatable, and action to improve the lives of older people who experience mental health difficulties is long overdue."
Ivan Lewis, a junior health minister, said: "This report raises fundamental questions for the NHS, care system, families and all communities."
The new figures show the scale of mental health problems in the over-65s is far greater than previously thought.
Experts warn unless prompt Government action is taken the number of those suffering mental health problems will rise by a third in the next 15 years.
The disturbing analysis is released today by the UK Inquiry into Mental Health and Well-Being in Later Life, involving experts from the London School of Economics, the Royal College of Nursing and the charity Age Concern.
According to the study, up to 2.6 million older people - one in four of those over 65 and two in five of those over 85 - are suffering from depression or serious symptoms of depression. Meanwhile, one in five people over 80 suffers from dementia.
Describing it as a "mental health pandemic", the report claims that these are the "invisible" people whose problems are often caused by loneliness, long-term illness and lack of independence.
Many avoid seeking help because of a perceived stigma. Those that do seek help often receive inferior treatment and have their symptoms put down to age.
The inquiry calls for a Government task force to be set up by 2008 to tackle the problem.
"There is no time to waste. As our population ages, we must ensure that the number of older people who suffer mental health problems are minimised," the report says.
"The majority of older people with mental health problems do not receive services. We need to shift our attention to them, to ensure they are supported by loved ones and enabled to care for themselves - by design, not by accident or neglect."
The study predicts that unless there are effective interventions, 3.5 million older people will have symptoms of depression and almost one million will have dementia by 2021.
It states that the Department of Health framework for mental health services has so far focused only on people up to 65.
Those over that age receive lower-cost and inferior services to younger people, even if they have the same condition.
Dr June Crown, the chairman of the inquiry said: "Mental health problems in later life are often preventable and treatable, and action to improve the lives of older people who experience mental health difficulties is long overdue."
Ivan Lewis, a junior health minister, said: "This report raises fundamental questions for the NHS, care system, families and all communities."
Monday 13 August 2007
Spelthorne: 'Tie rubbish to your Zimmer' 93-year-old told
A 93-year-old woman has slammed Spelthorne Council's new rubbish collection plans after being advised to tie her bin bags to her walking frame, reports Your Local Guardian.
Jessie Emer, of Cadbury Road, Sunbury, contacted after reading about blind residents' concerns about distinguishing the new bins, which are being rolled out across the borough.
Mrs Emer, a lifelong Conservative voter, said she would be unable to move the new wheelie bins as she walks with a frame.
She said: "I really do not know how they can do this without any consideration for the elderly. How am I now supposed to take my bins to the front of the house.
"The bin man just told me to tie the black bin bag to my frame and hobble to the wheelie bin."
Mrs Emer, who has lived in Spelthorne for 73 years, said even though she had contacted the council, nothing had been done and that she was not alone in having difficulty - her 96-year-old cousin is suffering from the same problem.
She said: "It is appalling and I am disgusted the council think they can do this without asking people.
"I can not move the bins about and I will not vote Conservative again. How do they think I can cope?
"They carried out a small test which proved nothing. Would they expect their own elderly relatives to move about these big bins?
"I am unable to walk without my frame never mind push anything."
Mrs Emer, who has lived through two world wars, said she believes the introduction of the new rubbish collection policy is penny pinching.
Jessie Emer, of Cadbury Road, Sunbury, contacted after reading about blind residents' concerns about distinguishing the new bins, which are being rolled out across the borough.
Mrs Emer, a lifelong Conservative voter, said she would be unable to move the new wheelie bins as she walks with a frame.
She said: "I really do not know how they can do this without any consideration for the elderly. How am I now supposed to take my bins to the front of the house.
"The bin man just told me to tie the black bin bag to my frame and hobble to the wheelie bin."
Mrs Emer, who has lived in Spelthorne for 73 years, said even though she had contacted the council, nothing had been done and that she was not alone in having difficulty - her 96-year-old cousin is suffering from the same problem.
She said: "It is appalling and I am disgusted the council think they can do this without asking people.
"I can not move the bins about and I will not vote Conservative again. How do they think I can cope?
"They carried out a small test which proved nothing. Would they expect their own elderly relatives to move about these big bins?
"I am unable to walk without my frame never mind push anything."
Mrs Emer, who has lived through two world wars, said she believes the introduction of the new rubbish collection policy is penny pinching.
Friday 10 August 2007
MP's back Wilson's drug plea
Two Manchester MPs are backing a campaign by music legend Anthony Wilson to persuade local health bosses to provide a pioneering cancer drug on the NHS - reports the Manchester Evening News.
Mr Wilson - known as `Mr Manchester' - was denied a new drug for kidney cancer called Sutent on the NHS and is now paying for the £3,500-a-month treatment with the help of friends.
Sutent has doubled the life expectancy of some patients in trials but is still being assessed for use across the NHS so individual health trusts are deciding on a case-by-case basis if they wish to fund it.
Two patients being treated alongside Mr Wilson at the Christie ARE receiving funding for the therapy because they live a few miles away in Cheshire, where a much higher proportion of patients are being funded.
Health bosses in Cumbria have also decided to fund the treatment for their patients, some of whom are cared for at Manchester's Christie Hospital.
Graham Stringer MP for Manchester Blackley and Tony Lloyd MP for Manchester Central have written to Manchester Primary Care Trust to ask them to pay for the drug until the Government watchdog decides whether Sutent should be provided nationally.
The letter reads: "We are writing to you following reports in the Manchester Evening News that a number of patients in Greater Manchester are not being allowed to be treated with the kidney cancer drug called Sutent, although we understand patients from Cumbria and Cheshire are receiving this treatment.
"We consider this to be completely unacceptable and would ask you to review this policy."
Health bosses say they have to make very difficult decisions in order to provide the best care for patients and have good procedures in place to look at the effectiveness of new drugs.
The M.E.N. has learned that in the last 16 months PCTs in Greater Manchester have turned down eight requests for Sutent backed by doctors at the Christie and approved one, while Central and East Cheshire PCT have turned down one patient and approved two.
Four people who were refused treatment with the new drugs on the NHS , including Mr Wilson, are paying privately.
He said: "I want to know what has happened to the 11 people who can't afford to pay for treatment.
"I want to know what their lives are like now, have they been sentenced to death by this decision? It is a scandal."
Manchester NHS Primary Care Trust, which has refused to pay for Mr Wilson's treatment, says there is not enough `demonstrable evidence to support the use of this drug in treating kidney cancer.'
But Prof Robert Hawkins, a kidney cancer expert from Christie, believes the refusals come down to cost - even though he estimates the total bill if Sutent was routinely available on the NHS would be £2m a year for Greater Manchester.
He said: "There is no doubt it would be available if it was cheap. I will now be able to prescribe Sutent to patients from Cumbria but not routinely to anyone else - which puts me as a doctor in a difficult position.
"I am delighted local MPs have asked the PCTs to look again at this issue. The PCTs in the north east looked at the best available new evidence and cost-effectiveness data taking full account of recent price reductions and accepted it was a cost-effective treatment. I would urge the Manchester PCTs to look again at this fuller information."
Tony Lloyd said: "If someone living a few metres over the border into Macclesfield can have this treatment but someone living in my constituency cannot, it can never be acceptable."
When the medical experts, in this case senior doctors from the Christie who are certainly regional experts and is some cases nationally and internationally renowned, recommend a treatment for a certain condition we have to take that seriously."
Graham Stringer said: "We are asking them to reconsider, this is not a maverick treatment, it is recommended by doctors and some patients are already being treated with it."
We contacted Manchester PCT but they said they were unable to comment on the letter because it raised issues involving health trusts across Greater Manchester.
Previously Shauna Dixon, clinical director for Oldham PCT, which is leading Greater Manchester cancer drug commissioning, said: "Every effort is made to make sure the best care is provided to patients.
"All NHS trusts give careful consideration to the very difficult decisions they make when they look at individual cases to make sure they safely meet their medical needs. A clear framework is used to ensure there is good evidence to demonstrate a drug is effective."
Mr Wilson - known as `Mr Manchester' - was denied a new drug for kidney cancer called Sutent on the NHS and is now paying for the £3,500-a-month treatment with the help of friends.
Sutent has doubled the life expectancy of some patients in trials but is still being assessed for use across the NHS so individual health trusts are deciding on a case-by-case basis if they wish to fund it.
Two patients being treated alongside Mr Wilson at the Christie ARE receiving funding for the therapy because they live a few miles away in Cheshire, where a much higher proportion of patients are being funded.
Health bosses in Cumbria have also decided to fund the treatment for their patients, some of whom are cared for at Manchester's Christie Hospital.
Graham Stringer MP for Manchester Blackley and Tony Lloyd MP for Manchester Central have written to Manchester Primary Care Trust to ask them to pay for the drug until the Government watchdog decides whether Sutent should be provided nationally.
The letter reads: "We are writing to you following reports in the Manchester Evening News that a number of patients in Greater Manchester are not being allowed to be treated with the kidney cancer drug called Sutent, although we understand patients from Cumbria and Cheshire are receiving this treatment.
"We consider this to be completely unacceptable and would ask you to review this policy."
Health bosses say they have to make very difficult decisions in order to provide the best care for patients and have good procedures in place to look at the effectiveness of new drugs.
The M.E.N. has learned that in the last 16 months PCTs in Greater Manchester have turned down eight requests for Sutent backed by doctors at the Christie and approved one, while Central and East Cheshire PCT have turned down one patient and approved two.
Four people who were refused treatment with the new drugs on the NHS , including Mr Wilson, are paying privately.
He said: "I want to know what has happened to the 11 people who can't afford to pay for treatment.
"I want to know what their lives are like now, have they been sentenced to death by this decision? It is a scandal."
Manchester NHS Primary Care Trust, which has refused to pay for Mr Wilson's treatment, says there is not enough `demonstrable evidence to support the use of this drug in treating kidney cancer.'
But Prof Robert Hawkins, a kidney cancer expert from Christie, believes the refusals come down to cost - even though he estimates the total bill if Sutent was routinely available on the NHS would be £2m a year for Greater Manchester.
He said: "There is no doubt it would be available if it was cheap. I will now be able to prescribe Sutent to patients from Cumbria but not routinely to anyone else - which puts me as a doctor in a difficult position.
"I am delighted local MPs have asked the PCTs to look again at this issue. The PCTs in the north east looked at the best available new evidence and cost-effectiveness data taking full account of recent price reductions and accepted it was a cost-effective treatment. I would urge the Manchester PCTs to look again at this fuller information."
Tony Lloyd said: "If someone living a few metres over the border into Macclesfield can have this treatment but someone living in my constituency cannot, it can never be acceptable."
When the medical experts, in this case senior doctors from the Christie who are certainly regional experts and is some cases nationally and internationally renowned, recommend a treatment for a certain condition we have to take that seriously."
Graham Stringer said: "We are asking them to reconsider, this is not a maverick treatment, it is recommended by doctors and some patients are already being treated with it."
We contacted Manchester PCT but they said they were unable to comment on the letter because it raised issues involving health trusts across Greater Manchester.
Previously Shauna Dixon, clinical director for Oldham PCT, which is leading Greater Manchester cancer drug commissioning, said: "Every effort is made to make sure the best care is provided to patients.
"All NHS trusts give careful consideration to the very difficult decisions they make when they look at individual cases to make sure they safely meet their medical needs. A clear framework is used to ensure there is good evidence to demonstrate a drug is effective."
Wednesday 8 August 2007
Primary school pupils miss all government targets
Four out of ten pupils could not read, write and add up properly by the time they left primary school this summer, the Government admitted yesterday.
The Times reports that national curriculum results for this age group improved slightly on last year, but the figures showed that 166,500 pupils did not meet the standard expected in writing, 67,000 failed to make it in reading, 54,000 could not reach it in science and 105,000 could not add up to the same level.
Of the 600,000 11-year-olds who took tests this summer, 80% made the grade in English, 84% in reading, 77% in maths and 88% in science. However, the figures also showed that the Government had missed its targets in all areas and that only 60% of the “Blair generation” of primary school pupils had met the expected level in all subjects, including reading, writing, maths and science.
Lord Adonis, the schools minister, said that more money will be spent on classroom assistants, one-to-one tuition, intensive reading and maths catch-up programmes and on better training for teachers.
There are few more important uses for public money than giving children the best start in life.
But hundreds of thousands of children are still being failed, while the government plans to lavish billions of pounds extra a year on the audit-failing EU.
By Lord Adonis's own admission, not enough money has been invested in classroom assistants, teacher training and extra tuition programmes.
Could it have been more, if so much money didn't have to be committed to the wasteful EU?
MPs will decide where the government's spending priorities should more properly lie, when they get to vote on the EU budget deal ... and answer for their choice to parents in their constituencies, come the next election.
The Times reports that national curriculum results for this age group improved slightly on last year, but the figures showed that 166,500 pupils did not meet the standard expected in writing, 67,000 failed to make it in reading, 54,000 could not reach it in science and 105,000 could not add up to the same level.
Of the 600,000 11-year-olds who took tests this summer, 80% made the grade in English, 84% in reading, 77% in maths and 88% in science. However, the figures also showed that the Government had missed its targets in all areas and that only 60% of the “Blair generation” of primary school pupils had met the expected level in all subjects, including reading, writing, maths and science.
Lord Adonis, the schools minister, said that more money will be spent on classroom assistants, one-to-one tuition, intensive reading and maths catch-up programmes and on better training for teachers.
There are few more important uses for public money than giving children the best start in life.
But hundreds of thousands of children are still being failed, while the government plans to lavish billions of pounds extra a year on the audit-failing EU.
By Lord Adonis's own admission, not enough money has been invested in classroom assistants, teacher training and extra tuition programmes.
Could it have been more, if so much money didn't have to be committed to the wasteful EU?
MPs will decide where the government's spending priorities should more properly lie, when they get to vote on the EU budget deal ... and answer for their choice to parents in their constituencies, come the next election.
Lancashire: 'Give ambulances the money’ call
Campaigners have called for more funds after it was revealed that four out of ten ambulances should be taken off the roads - reports the Blackpool Citizen.
Cash-strapped North West Ambulance Service (NWAS) NHS Trust bosses can afford to replace only a fraction of the accident and emergency ambulances and rapid response vehicles which have reached the end of their shelf life in Lancashire.
Now officials from the NWAS public and patient information forum - the patients' watchdog - said the situation should not be allowed to continue.
Forum spokesman Salle Dare said: "Our concern, representing patients, will be to put pressure on the primary care trusts and Government to provide sufficient money to help overcome this situation."
The forum appreciated the pressures which the ambulance trust worked under, and the competing demands made upon the service.
But she added: "It is the Cinderella of the emergency services - when everyone thinks of the ambulance trust they then only think of accident and emergency but there are many different aspects to it.
"The new plans for the ambulance service, which serves a much greater role, attending to people at home and carrying out more diagnostic work, means that we need to have a modern service to meet these demands."
Cash-strapped North West Ambulance Service (NWAS) NHS Trust bosses can afford to replace only a fraction of the accident and emergency ambulances and rapid response vehicles which have reached the end of their shelf life in Lancashire.
Now officials from the NWAS public and patient information forum - the patients' watchdog - said the situation should not be allowed to continue.
Forum spokesman Salle Dare said: "Our concern, representing patients, will be to put pressure on the primary care trusts and Government to provide sufficient money to help overcome this situation."
The forum appreciated the pressures which the ambulance trust worked under, and the competing demands made upon the service.
But she added: "It is the Cinderella of the emergency services - when everyone thinks of the ambulance trust they then only think of accident and emergency but there are many different aspects to it.
"The new plans for the ambulance service, which serves a much greater role, attending to people at home and carrying out more diagnostic work, means that we need to have a modern service to meet these demands."
Labels:
ambulance service,
lancashire,
NHS cuts
NHS fails dementia victims, admit ministers
Thousands of dementia sufferers are being "failed" by a health system which does not diagnose their problems early enough or at all, the Government admitted yesterday - reports
The Daily Telegraph reports health experts claims that dementia is now costing society £539 a second.
Half of all victims never get a proper diagnosis, with symptoms attributed to "old age" because doctors are not trained to recognise the symptoms, and drugs are strictly rationed.
In a belated acknowledgement of the severity of the situation, Ivan Lewis, the care services minister, said the issue was "one of the great challenges now facing society" and that dementia must be "brought out of the shadows".
"The current system is failing too many dementia sufferers and their carers," he said, adding that the disease, "strikes fear into all of us".
Mr Lewis was speaking yesterday as he launched a group to work on a strategy to improve the diagnosis and treatment of dementia.
But how much money is he putting into tackling this serious problem - intro training of health workers and buying better (perhaps more expensive) drugs to ease people's suffering.
And could that amount be more if so much wasn't being wasted on the audit-failing EU?
The Daily Telegraph reports health experts claims that dementia is now costing society £539 a second.
Half of all victims never get a proper diagnosis, with symptoms attributed to "old age" because doctors are not trained to recognise the symptoms, and drugs are strictly rationed.
In a belated acknowledgement of the severity of the situation, Ivan Lewis, the care services minister, said the issue was "one of the great challenges now facing society" and that dementia must be "brought out of the shadows".
"The current system is failing too many dementia sufferers and their carers," he said, adding that the disease, "strikes fear into all of us".
Mr Lewis was speaking yesterday as he launched a group to work on a strategy to improve the diagnosis and treatment of dementia.
But how much money is he putting into tackling this serious problem - intro training of health workers and buying better (perhaps more expensive) drugs to ease people's suffering.
And could that amount be more if so much wasn't being wasted on the audit-failing EU?
NHS dentists treat 47,000 fewer patients
The Daily Telegraph reports today that 47,000 fewer people a year are receiving dental treatment on the NHS following the introduction of controversial reforms, according to the Government figures.
The report also claims that there are 500 fewer dentists working on the NHS now than before the new dentist contracts were introduced in April 2006.
Patients groups and dentists have critised the report for claiming that the new system has improved services, saying access to dental care under the NHS has not improved and people are struggling to be seen.
Citizens Advice says there are two million people trying to registers with an NHS dentist but have been unable to get on the books.
And the British Dental Association said these figures were extremely conservative and were likely to actually be significantly higher.
The new contract aimed to simplify a multitude of different payment methods, but this has meant that dentists are paid just once for doing fillings, no matter how many they do for a patient.
A quota system on the number of patients they were allowed to treat in a year was also introduced. But some practices are filling their year's quota in nine months and are having to close for the remainder of the year.
The controversy over the new system led to hundreds of dentists leaving the NHS altogether.
Peter Ward, Chief Executive of British Dental Association, said "This first year report on the new untested contract for dentists justifies our concerns and will do little to rebuild trust with the profession.
"By the government's own admission, we now have fewer NHS dentists and access to care for patients remains patchy. This is not a picture of success and confidence."
Which? research showed 59% of NHS practices in London were taking on new patients compared to just 13% in the North West.
Liz Phelps, from Citizens Advice, said its bureaux still received reports of huge problems.
She said "The shocking truth is that despite all the assurances that the situation is improving, there has been no overall increase at all in the number of patients seen by NHS dentists in the first year of the reforms.
"That means that even by the Governments own estimate there are still two million people trying to get NHS dental treatment who cant find a dentist."
Claims by Health Minister Ann Keen that the new system has proved better for patients have also been criticised by Richard Thomas, secretary of the Federation of London Local Dental Committees, who has said that new dental services have only been provided at the cost of services elsewhere, as there is no extra money in the system.
"Where PCTS have increased access to dental services in an area of higher need, it is at the expense of other areas because there is no extra money", he said.
The report also claims that there are 500 fewer dentists working on the NHS now than before the new dentist contracts were introduced in April 2006.
Patients groups and dentists have critised the report for claiming that the new system has improved services, saying access to dental care under the NHS has not improved and people are struggling to be seen.
Citizens Advice says there are two million people trying to registers with an NHS dentist but have been unable to get on the books.
And the British Dental Association said these figures were extremely conservative and were likely to actually be significantly higher.
The new contract aimed to simplify a multitude of different payment methods, but this has meant that dentists are paid just once for doing fillings, no matter how many they do for a patient.
A quota system on the number of patients they were allowed to treat in a year was also introduced. But some practices are filling their year's quota in nine months and are having to close for the remainder of the year.
The controversy over the new system led to hundreds of dentists leaving the NHS altogether.
Peter Ward, Chief Executive of British Dental Association, said "This first year report on the new untested contract for dentists justifies our concerns and will do little to rebuild trust with the profession.
"By the government's own admission, we now have fewer NHS dentists and access to care for patients remains patchy. This is not a picture of success and confidence."
Which? research showed 59% of NHS practices in London were taking on new patients compared to just 13% in the North West.
Liz Phelps, from Citizens Advice, said its bureaux still received reports of huge problems.
She said "The shocking truth is that despite all the assurances that the situation is improving, there has been no overall increase at all in the number of patients seen by NHS dentists in the first year of the reforms.
"That means that even by the Governments own estimate there are still two million people trying to get NHS dental treatment who cant find a dentist."
Claims by Health Minister Ann Keen that the new system has proved better for patients have also been criticised by Richard Thomas, secretary of the Federation of London Local Dental Committees, who has said that new dental services have only been provided at the cost of services elsewhere, as there is no extra money in the system.
"Where PCTS have increased access to dental services in an area of higher need, it is at the expense of other areas because there is no extra money", he said.
Liberal Democrat health spokesman Norman Lamb called for an independent review, saying "This report is almost Orwellian in its interpretation of the truth.
"It is a total whitewash and will be of little comfort to patients who cannot find a local NHS dentist and is an insult to the many dentists who are forced to turn away patients because of the new contract."
GP out-of-hours complaints soar
The number of serious complaints made against GPs over out-of-hours care has soared in recent years, reports the BBC.
Figures show that the two leading family doctor insurance companies, which cover nine out of ten GPs in England, dealt with nearly 300 complaints in 2006.
One of the firms has seen cases triple since a new contract started in 2004.
Patients said it showed the service had got worse and urged Gordon Brown to take action, but doctors said people were more likely to complain now.
Critics of the new GP contract have always maintained that the service has got worse with patients struggling to get through to doctors out-of-hours.
And the latest figures come after Gordon Brown promised to address problems with out-of-hours care on the eve of becoming prime minister.
The Medical Defence Union (MDU) and Medical Protection Society (MPS), which also offer legal advice, only get involved with the most serious and complex cases, such as those that involved deaths, compensation claims or issues that involve the regulatory body, the General Medical Council.
The MPS figures show that officials started dealing with 30 new cases in the UK in 2003 - the last full year under the old system - but by 2006 that had risen to 100.
This was during a period when the overall number of cases about doctors remained steady at around 3,500.
Meanwhile, the MDU dealt with 182 complaints in England last year, up from 120 in 2002.
Stephanie Bown, of the MPS, said doctors are under a lot of pressure dealing with lots of patients "one after another".
Michael Summers, chairman of the Patients Association, said: "These figures are worrying, but not surprising.
"It is quite clear the service has got worse. Patients complain that they cannot get through and we have heard of doctors who have to travel hundreds of miles to see people.
"It was good that Gordon Brown said he would be looking at this issue and we would urge him to act straight away. Out-of-hours care needs more funding."
Figures show that the two leading family doctor insurance companies, which cover nine out of ten GPs in England, dealt with nearly 300 complaints in 2006.
One of the firms has seen cases triple since a new contract started in 2004.
Patients said it showed the service had got worse and urged Gordon Brown to take action, but doctors said people were more likely to complain now.
Critics of the new GP contract have always maintained that the service has got worse with patients struggling to get through to doctors out-of-hours.
And the latest figures come after Gordon Brown promised to address problems with out-of-hours care on the eve of becoming prime minister.
The Medical Defence Union (MDU) and Medical Protection Society (MPS), which also offer legal advice, only get involved with the most serious and complex cases, such as those that involved deaths, compensation claims or issues that involve the regulatory body, the General Medical Council.
The MPS figures show that officials started dealing with 30 new cases in the UK in 2003 - the last full year under the old system - but by 2006 that had risen to 100.
This was during a period when the overall number of cases about doctors remained steady at around 3,500.
Meanwhile, the MDU dealt with 182 complaints in England last year, up from 120 in 2002.
Stephanie Bown, of the MPS, said doctors are under a lot of pressure dealing with lots of patients "one after another".
Michael Summers, chairman of the Patients Association, said: "These figures are worrying, but not surprising.
"It is quite clear the service has got worse. Patients complain that they cannot get through and we have heard of doctors who have to travel hundreds of miles to see people.
"It was good that Gordon Brown said he would be looking at this issue and we would urge him to act straight away. Out-of-hours care needs more funding."
Tuesday 7 August 2007
Hospices warn of cash shortfall
Hospice managers in Hull and Grimsby have warned services could be cut amid a shortfall in government cash, according to the BBC.
Dove House Hospice in Hull is facing a deficit of £400,000 and says it has seen its money cut in real terms.
Finance director Chris Sadler said: "That is not something we could sustain indefinitely. The only way we can really save costs is to shut beds."
Bosses at Grimsby's St Andrew's Hospice said it may have to cut services as it forecasts a £100,000 deficit this year.
Two thirds of the hospices in England are run by the voluntary sector, providing support to the NHS.
St Andrew's Hospice fundraising and marketing manager Jane Whenham-White said: "The government told us two years ago that end-of-life care was its top priority and it had a strategy to meet that need.
"But they haven't yet come up with any funding.
"Because we actually haven't got a guaranteed income it is very, very difficult for us to plan our services.
"The only way to cut costs is to lay staff off, close beds or drop services.
"We don't want to do that, but we may have to if the funds are not available."
She said the hospice was relying more and more heavily on income generated by its shops and a lottery scheme.
"The worst thing is that because of the geographic area we cover we have been told we should have 16 adult beds here and we've only got eight.
"That means at a time when we should be doubling the number of beds we're actually facing the real prospect of having to cut back."
Dove House Hospice in Hull is facing a deficit of £400,000 and says it has seen its money cut in real terms.
Finance director Chris Sadler said: "That is not something we could sustain indefinitely. The only way we can really save costs is to shut beds."
Bosses at Grimsby's St Andrew's Hospice said it may have to cut services as it forecasts a £100,000 deficit this year.
Two thirds of the hospices in England are run by the voluntary sector, providing support to the NHS.
St Andrew's Hospice fundraising and marketing manager Jane Whenham-White said: "The government told us two years ago that end-of-life care was its top priority and it had a strategy to meet that need.
"But they haven't yet come up with any funding.
"Because we actually haven't got a guaranteed income it is very, very difficult for us to plan our services.
"The only way to cut costs is to lay staff off, close beds or drop services.
"We don't want to do that, but we may have to if the funds are not available."
She said the hospice was relying more and more heavily on income generated by its shops and a lottery scheme.
"The worst thing is that because of the geographic area we cover we have been told we should have 16 adult beds here and we've only got eight.
"That means at a time when we should be doubling the number of beds we're actually facing the real prospect of having to cut back."
Monday 6 August 2007
NHS malnutrition cases jump 64%
The number of people leaving NHS hospitals in England malnourished has risen by almost two thirds so far this decade, official figures have revealed.
The London Metro newspaper reports that there was a 64% jump to 2,265 cases in 2005/6, compared to 2000/1 figures.
The rise comes as the number of meals left untouched by patients grew by 22% to 13 million.
Whether the reason for this rise is unappealing hospital food, or insufficient supervision by hospital staff of those patients at risk of not feeding themselves properly, clearly greater investment is needed either to relieve over-stretched staff or in better quality food.
What are MPs doing to tackle this basic problem, before considering lavishing a 63% increase in payments to the audit-failing EU?
The London Metro newspaper reports that there was a 64% jump to 2,265 cases in 2005/6, compared to 2000/1 figures.
The rise comes as the number of meals left untouched by patients grew by 22% to 13 million.
Whether the reason for this rise is unappealing hospital food, or insufficient supervision by hospital staff of those patients at risk of not feeding themselves properly, clearly greater investment is needed either to relieve over-stretched staff or in better quality food.
What are MPs doing to tackle this basic problem, before considering lavishing a 63% increase in payments to the audit-failing EU?
NHS 'is still failing over IVF treatment'
Less than half of NHS trusts fund the transfer of frozen IVF embryos, despite guidance saying they should, the London Metro newspaper reports today.
In 2004, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) said that primary care trusts should allow spare embryos produced as a result of fertility treatment - that can be frozen and implanted later - to be transferred as part of the NHS treatment.
But a letter from health minister Dawn Primarolo has revealed that many are still failing to pay for this part of the treatment, and has also revealed a continuing postcode lottery over IVF treatment in England.
Ms Primarolo said that the government recognised this caused "distress to many childless couples".
But presumably she nevertheless intends to vote billions more pounds to the audit-failing EU that could provide NHS trusts with the resources they need to correct this problem. Therein lies the hypocrisy.
In 2004, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) said that primary care trusts should allow spare embryos produced as a result of fertility treatment - that can be frozen and implanted later - to be transferred as part of the NHS treatment.
But a letter from health minister Dawn Primarolo has revealed that many are still failing to pay for this part of the treatment, and has also revealed a continuing postcode lottery over IVF treatment in England.
Ms Primarolo said that the government recognised this caused "distress to many childless couples".
But presumably she nevertheless intends to vote billions more pounds to the audit-failing EU that could provide NHS trusts with the resources they need to correct this problem. Therein lies the hypocrisy.
Labels:
hospitals,
infertility treatment,
NHS cuts
Saturday 4 August 2007
NHS maternity care 'is in crisis'
Fears over the standard of NHS services for expectant mothers were heightened last night after it emerged that the number of maternity beds has fallen by up to 40% in some regions - reports the Daily Telegraph.
The information, obtained from a parliamentary answer, said that since Labour came to power in 1997, there had been an 18% reduction in the number of maternity beds for every 100,000 people - equivalent to almost 2,000 beds in the past 10 years.
But in some strategic health authority areas, the drop was much more dramatic with reductions of 40% in north-west London and South Yorkshire.
There were 35% fewer maternity beds in the Leicestershire, Northants and Rutland area as well in the South-West Peninsula authority area since 1997.
Even in the County Durham and Tees Valley, where until recently Tony Blair had his constituency, the decline was 32%.
A Tory spokesman insisted that Labour could not claim that home births made up for the decline as Government figures showed that only 2% of women gave birth at home in 2006/07.
The answer also highlighted the relative lack of midwives, confirming that their numbers are not keeping pace with the number of live births.
Since 2001, the number of live births had risen by 12.5% but the number of midwives rose by 4.5%.
The information, obtained from a parliamentary answer, said that since Labour came to power in 1997, there had been an 18% reduction in the number of maternity beds for every 100,000 people - equivalent to almost 2,000 beds in the past 10 years.
But in some strategic health authority areas, the drop was much more dramatic with reductions of 40% in north-west London and South Yorkshire.
There were 35% fewer maternity beds in the Leicestershire, Northants and Rutland area as well in the South-West Peninsula authority area since 1997.
Even in the County Durham and Tees Valley, where until recently Tony Blair had his constituency, the decline was 32%.
A Tory spokesman insisted that Labour could not claim that home births made up for the decline as Government figures showed that only 2% of women gave birth at home in 2006/07.
The answer also highlighted the relative lack of midwives, confirming that their numbers are not keeping pace with the number of live births.
Since 2001, the number of live births had risen by 12.5% but the number of midwives rose by 4.5%.
Labels:
county durham,
leicestershire,
london,
maternity,
NHS cuts,
northamptonshire
Friday 3 August 2007
Bolton: Canal repair under threat
Improvements to the local canal network are in jeopardy because of cuts to Government funding - reports The Bolton News.
Regeneration work on the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal is described as being at risk as British Waterways prepares for a £35 million shortfall in Whitehall funding by 2011.
A report from the Parliamentary Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee voices "extreme concern" about the scaling back of public funding to British Waterways, which is responsible for 2,200 miles of rivers and canals nationwide.
John Fletcher, chairman of both the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal Society and the International Waterways Association, said: "This report identifies the elements that government needs to address - one of which is the threat to waterway regeneration by funding cuts.
"Money is tight but these canals fulfil many government objectives such as educations, green routes, healthy living and jobs.
"The Manchester, Bury and Bolton Canal has always depended on third-party funding but British Waterways needs the cushion of funding which Defra is depriving it of.
"I look forward to working with Defra and British Waterways to work out a new architecture of funding to resolve current problems."
Mr Fletcher will meet with senior civil servants later this week.
British Waterways is already under pressure after shortfalls forced it to scrap £5.6 million of planned refurbishment work on stretches including the Ribble Link, which joins the Lancaster and Leeds-Liverpool canals via the River Douglas.
Waterways Minister Jonathan Shaw said: "We will now work with British Waterways closely in carefully considering the committee's recommendations, but I can say that I am committed to ensuring there is good communication and effective working relationships between Defra ministers and officials at British Waterways."
The committee called for the National Audit Office to review conflicting claims about the state of British Waterways' finances.
Regeneration work on the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal is described as being at risk as British Waterways prepares for a £35 million shortfall in Whitehall funding by 2011.
A report from the Parliamentary Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee voices "extreme concern" about the scaling back of public funding to British Waterways, which is responsible for 2,200 miles of rivers and canals nationwide.
John Fletcher, chairman of both the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal Society and the International Waterways Association, said: "This report identifies the elements that government needs to address - one of which is the threat to waterway regeneration by funding cuts.
"Money is tight but these canals fulfil many government objectives such as educations, green routes, healthy living and jobs.
"The Manchester, Bury and Bolton Canal has always depended on third-party funding but British Waterways needs the cushion of funding which Defra is depriving it of.
"I look forward to working with Defra and British Waterways to work out a new architecture of funding to resolve current problems."
Mr Fletcher will meet with senior civil servants later this week.
British Waterways is already under pressure after shortfalls forced it to scrap £5.6 million of planned refurbishment work on stretches including the Ribble Link, which joins the Lancaster and Leeds-Liverpool canals via the River Douglas.
Waterways Minister Jonathan Shaw said: "We will now work with British Waterways closely in carefully considering the committee's recommendations, but I can say that I am committed to ensuring there is good communication and effective working relationships between Defra ministers and officials at British Waterways."
The committee called for the National Audit Office to review conflicting claims about the state of British Waterways' finances.
Derby: Alarm as care home faces closure
Fears have been raised that Derbyshire care homes could come under pressure after an authority admitted it was looking at plans to shut one - reports the BBC.
Derby City Council has announced a consultation period over the future of Bramble Brook in Mickleover.
The council said residential care had become less popular in recent years and it had 80 vacancies across the city.
Age Concern said greater emphasis on home care meant many care homes were facing a financial squeeze.
There are about 40 residents and 32 staff at Bramble Brook, which has been selected as it provides no specialist care.
The families of those at Bramble Brook said the idea of being moved away from friends and familiar surroundings was causing distress.
Katy Pugh, chief executive of Age Concern in Derby, said: "I think finances are very tight and many of the new strategies and agendas mean money will have to be redistributed, so it is possible there will be more closures."
She added: "Experience has told us that older people facing this sort of situation suffer greatly.
"They become very anxious and it is more likely their health will suffer and certainly these changes are much harder to cope with at that time of life."
Derby City Council has announced a consultation period over the future of Bramble Brook in Mickleover.
The council said residential care had become less popular in recent years and it had 80 vacancies across the city.
Age Concern said greater emphasis on home care meant many care homes were facing a financial squeeze.
There are about 40 residents and 32 staff at Bramble Brook, which has been selected as it provides no specialist care.
The families of those at Bramble Brook said the idea of being moved away from friends and familiar surroundings was causing distress.
Katy Pugh, chief executive of Age Concern in Derby, said: "I think finances are very tight and many of the new strategies and agendas mean money will have to be redistributed, so it is possible there will be more closures."
She added: "Experience has told us that older people facing this sort of situation suffer greatly.
"They become very anxious and it is more likely their health will suffer and certainly these changes are much harder to cope with at that time of life."
Labels:
council cuts,
derby,
derbyshire,
elderly care
Thursday 2 August 2007
A&E decision halts cancer centre
Plans for new health services in Ayrshire have been put on hold in order to retain an accident and emergency unit, BBC Scotland reports.
Last month, Scottish Health Secretary Nicola Sturgeon MSP overturned her predecessor's decision to close the units at Ayr Hospital and Monklands in Lanarkshire.
But due to shortfalls of public funds, this means that a new cancer centre based at Ayr is among the proposed services being suspended.
NHS Ayrshire and Arran had also planned community casualty units at Girvan, Cumnock and Irvine.
The decision to keep Ayr and Monklands A&E units open was one of the first announcements made by Ms Sturgeon when she became health secretary.
Gavin Tate, a consultant orthopaedic surgeon at Crosshouse Hospital in Kilmarnock, said he was worried that health services in Ayrshire and Arran would suffer.
"The problem will be that the health board may well, if required to maintain two full A&E departments, be unable to fulfil the other extensive plans for the improvement in cancer services, eye services, local community casualty units and other significant developments." said Mr Tate.
While responsibility for Scotland's health service has been devolved to the Scottish Parliament, and the allocation of funds is no longer decided in Whitehall, Westminster MPs for Ayr do still bear responsibility for how much public money is available to the Scottish Executive.
Clearly if planned NHS improvements are having to be abandoned to keep basic A&E services open in Ayr, then local MPs who vote to waste vast sums of public money by gifting it to the audit-failing EU will get the blame for that money not being available to improve local health services instead.
Last month, Scottish Health Secretary Nicola Sturgeon MSP overturned her predecessor's decision to close the units at Ayr Hospital and Monklands in Lanarkshire.
But due to shortfalls of public funds, this means that a new cancer centre based at Ayr is among the proposed services being suspended.
NHS Ayrshire and Arran had also planned community casualty units at Girvan, Cumnock and Irvine.
The decision to keep Ayr and Monklands A&E units open was one of the first announcements made by Ms Sturgeon when she became health secretary.
Gavin Tate, a consultant orthopaedic surgeon at Crosshouse Hospital in Kilmarnock, said he was worried that health services in Ayrshire and Arran would suffer.
"The problem will be that the health board may well, if required to maintain two full A&E departments, be unable to fulfil the other extensive plans for the improvement in cancer services, eye services, local community casualty units and other significant developments." said Mr Tate.
While responsibility for Scotland's health service has been devolved to the Scottish Parliament, and the allocation of funds is no longer decided in Whitehall, Westminster MPs for Ayr do still bear responsibility for how much public money is available to the Scottish Executive.
Clearly if planned NHS improvements are having to be abandoned to keep basic A&E services open in Ayr, then local MPs who vote to waste vast sums of public money by gifting it to the audit-failing EU will get the blame for that money not being available to improve local health services instead.
Pain relief drug ruled too costly for the NHS
Thousands of arthritis sufferers will be denied treatment with proven benefits by a decision not to pay for a new drug, reports The Times today.
In another example of how the extra £2.5bn a year that the government has unjustifiably pledged to the EU could be used to help those who need it most - rather than handed to an organisation that has failed its audit for twelve years in a row - the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is to recommend that the new drug Abtacept (Orencia) does not represent "value for money".
Yet the drug has been shown to improve dramatically the severest symptoms of arthritis in almost half of patients.
Its manufacturer, Bristol Myers Squibb, estimated in its application to NICE that around 3,500 patients a year would benefit. But other studies show that around 12,000 patients could potentially benefit.
Published data shows that in trials Abatacept produced a 50% reduction in symptoms in about 40% of the patients who used it in conjunction with an older drug, methotrexate.
Though the cost would be about £9,300 a year on average, all of those treated would be sufferers who had already been treated unsuccessfully with anti-TNF drugs, which are equally expensive.
Ailsa Bosworth, chief executive of the National Rheumatoid Arthritis Society said, “This is extremely bad news for people living with severe rheumatoid arthritis.
“Denying patients the option of Abatacept leaves some of them with the unacceptable choices of being put back on to treatments they have already failed on, palliative care or taking large doses of steroids, which have unacceptable side-effects over the long term.”
A NICE spokesman said: “Having examined cost-effectiveness analyses on the drug against a range of comparators, the committee concluded that Abatacept could not be considered a cost-effective use of NHS resources.”
The problems of balancing drug costs against benefits have led a growing number of patients who are denied treatments to resort to legal action.
Undoubtedly, any MPs who approve this blatant waste of public money by voting in favour of the European Communities (Finance) Bill when it comes before Parliament in the next session will forfeit any claim to be supporting the development of a modern, effective health service.
In another example of how the extra £2.5bn a year that the government has unjustifiably pledged to the EU could be used to help those who need it most - rather than handed to an organisation that has failed its audit for twelve years in a row - the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is to recommend that the new drug Abtacept (Orencia) does not represent "value for money".
Yet the drug has been shown to improve dramatically the severest symptoms of arthritis in almost half of patients.
Its manufacturer, Bristol Myers Squibb, estimated in its application to NICE that around 3,500 patients a year would benefit. But other studies show that around 12,000 patients could potentially benefit.
Published data shows that in trials Abatacept produced a 50% reduction in symptoms in about 40% of the patients who used it in conjunction with an older drug, methotrexate.
Though the cost would be about £9,300 a year on average, all of those treated would be sufferers who had already been treated unsuccessfully with anti-TNF drugs, which are equally expensive.
Ailsa Bosworth, chief executive of the National Rheumatoid Arthritis Society said, “This is extremely bad news for people living with severe rheumatoid arthritis.
“Denying patients the option of Abatacept leaves some of them with the unacceptable choices of being put back on to treatments they have already failed on, palliative care or taking large doses of steroids, which have unacceptable side-effects over the long term.”
A NICE spokesman said: “Having examined cost-effectiveness analyses on the drug against a range of comparators, the committee concluded that Abatacept could not be considered a cost-effective use of NHS resources.”
The problems of balancing drug costs against benefits have led a growing number of patients who are denied treatments to resort to legal action.
Undoubtedly, any MPs who approve this blatant waste of public money by voting in favour of the European Communities (Finance) Bill when it comes before Parliament in the next session will forfeit any claim to be supporting the development of a modern, effective health service.
Wednesday 1 August 2007
UK 'fails child cancer patients'
Survival rates for child cancer are worse in the UK than on mainland Europe, the BBC reports today, highlighting that more investment is required to improve treatment.
A study in Lancet Oncology highlighted the fact that diagnosis for some types of cancer is three times more likely in Germany than the UK.
The paper highlighted trials carried out on Wilm's tumour - a common childhood tumour - in Germany.
It showed that, between 1994 and 2001, 27.4% of patients had a cancer that was first identified during a visit to a health professional for an unrelated problem, or by routine surveillance.
By comparison, in the UK, just 11% of patients presenting to the Royal Marsden Hospital in London and 4% of patients referred to the Newcastle Hospital or the Royal Victoria Infirmary in Newcastle were identified.
Professor Alan Craft, of the University of Newcastle, said child cancer was a low priority for the NHS, and called for urgent reforms.
He recommended routine surveillance of children as standard across the UK and that health visitors needed to be more aware of the symptoms of cancer.
He also believes that children in the UK have been receiving a different treatment protocol from those in Europe, possibly involving first-line treatment or less-intensive treatment during relapse.
Professor Craft said: "Waiting lists and hospital beds keep chief executives awake at night, but I don't think the health of children does."
A study in Lancet Oncology highlighted the fact that diagnosis for some types of cancer is three times more likely in Germany than the UK.
The paper highlighted trials carried out on Wilm's tumour - a common childhood tumour - in Germany.
It showed that, between 1994 and 2001, 27.4% of patients had a cancer that was first identified during a visit to a health professional for an unrelated problem, or by routine surveillance.
By comparison, in the UK, just 11% of patients presenting to the Royal Marsden Hospital in London and 4% of patients referred to the Newcastle Hospital or the Royal Victoria Infirmary in Newcastle were identified.
Professor Alan Craft, of the University of Newcastle, said child cancer was a low priority for the NHS, and called for urgent reforms.
He recommended routine surveillance of children as standard across the UK and that health visitors needed to be more aware of the symptoms of cancer.
He also believes that children in the UK have been receiving a different treatment protocol from those in Europe, possibly involving first-line treatment or less-intensive treatment during relapse.
Professor Craft said: "Waiting lists and hospital beds keep chief executives awake at night, but I don't think the health of children does."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
