The BBC reports today that the NHS is facing the most severe and sustained financial shortfall in its history after 2011, according to a report by health service managers.
The NHS Confederation report says the health service in England will not survive unchanged and conference attendees have been told that they face an "extremely challenging" financial outlook.
The report reveals that the NHS in England is facing a real-terms reduction of between £8bn and £10bn over the three years after 2011.
During the same period the government plans to hand the European Union £30.6 bn (gross) or £18bn (net), despite EU auditors criticising the accuracy of the EU's accounts now for 14 years in a row. These audit failures are accompanied by regular reports of waste and fraud involving very large sums.
The report says that the cost of new treatments and the ageing population are two of the factors causing the inflation in the health service.
According to the OHE, the £8-10bn at stake would cover the costs of family or mental health services for one year, 2 years of cancer treatment, normal births for 27 years or over one and a half years of prescription charges.
When is the government going to take seriously the major funding threats essential public services face, and cut this scandalous and unjustifiable waste of billions of pound on an organisation that cannot tell us with any certainty how that money is being spent, yet whose employees and bureaucrats and MEPs clearly live a lavish lifestyle?
Showing posts with label NHS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NHS. Show all posts
Wednesday, 10 June 2009
Friday, 20 June 2008
Charity props up NHS cancer care
The NHS relies heavily on charitable donations for the treatment and support of children and teenagers with cancer, research reported by the BBC suggests.
Up to half of funding in NHS specialist cancer centres in England and Wales comes from charities, a team of health economists has calculated.
Some oncologists said without charity support many services would not exist.
The funding level raises questions about the government's responsibility for cancer care, the researchers say.
The report's author, Dr Dyfrig Hughes, said, "The take-home message is that it is a significant contribution towards work which arguably should be paid for by the NHS."
A total of 51 charities have been set up specifically to assist children with cancer and 340 charities had made some kind of financial contribution, the University of Bangor team report in the Journal of Child Health Care.
A further 28 organisations had been set up to provide funds for hospices.
Figures from 2003 show that between £25m and £38m (depending on the method of calculation used) of funding for cancer care came from national charities, compared with between £38m and £55m coming from the NHS.
Yet these sums are tiny factions of the amount of money the government pays to wasteful organisations like the EU, following the government's pledge to pay 63% more a year to the EU from last year.
With the net payments now reaching £115 million every single week - in total £6bn a year - even the upper figures given for cancer care amount to less than a week's money given to the audit-failing EU. Right priorities?
Study author, Dr Dyfrig Hughes, said the charity figures could be an underestimate, as they did not include the many hospital and local charities which also provide funding.
"For things which might be labelled as luxury that's fine, but essential things should come from central resources to ensure equal access," he said.
Up to half of funding in NHS specialist cancer centres in England and Wales comes from charities, a team of health economists has calculated.
Some oncologists said without charity support many services would not exist.
The funding level raises questions about the government's responsibility for cancer care, the researchers say.
The report's author, Dr Dyfrig Hughes, said, "The take-home message is that it is a significant contribution towards work which arguably should be paid for by the NHS."
A total of 51 charities have been set up specifically to assist children with cancer and 340 charities had made some kind of financial contribution, the University of Bangor team report in the Journal of Child Health Care.
A further 28 organisations had been set up to provide funds for hospices.
Figures from 2003 show that between £25m and £38m (depending on the method of calculation used) of funding for cancer care came from national charities, compared with between £38m and £55m coming from the NHS.
Yet these sums are tiny factions of the amount of money the government pays to wasteful organisations like the EU, following the government's pledge to pay 63% more a year to the EU from last year.
With the net payments now reaching £115 million every single week - in total £6bn a year - even the upper figures given for cancer care amount to less than a week's money given to the audit-failing EU. Right priorities?
Study author, Dr Dyfrig Hughes, said the charity figures could be an underestimate, as they did not include the many hospital and local charities which also provide funding.
"For things which might be labelled as luxury that's fine, but essential things should come from central resources to ensure equal access," he said.
Thursday, 2 August 2007
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."
Friday, 27 July 2007
Bridlington: Axe falls on mental health wards
A mental health ward is to close at Bridlington Hospital within weeks, and a second could close in three years - reports the BBC.
The Humber Mental Health NHS Trust said it was planning to treat more patients in their homes.
Mick Pilling, who is leading a campaign to save the hospital, said it was "another nail in the coffin, another much-needed service gone."
Last November it emerged the hospital's maternity unit is to close as the local NHS trust tackles £7m of overspending.
Hospital bosses had said mothers-to-be in the town would be encouraged to opt for home births.
Now officials at the mental health trust, which runs the threatened Waters Ward in Bridlington, said home treatment for older patients would replace in-patient services.
They said the Waters Ward would close in the autumn, with beds transferring to Castle Hill Hospital at Cottingham, near Hull.
Officials said that either the Buckrose Ward at the hospital or Bartholomew House at Goole would also close, probably within three to five years.
Mr Pilling added: "Waters Ward will close in the autumn and be taken to Castle Hill by all accounts.
The mental health trust said some patients would eventually be treated at a new facility to be built in the East Riding.
The mental health trust is part of the bigger Scarborough and North East Yorkshire NHS Trust which earlier this month announced it was to axe 600 jobs - a third of its workforce - at two Yorkshire hospitals.
The trust, which runs hospitals in Scarborough and Bridlington, plans to close wards and reduce non-clinical support services to save £15m.
Union officials had said the cuts would have a "devastating" impact on patients.
The trust's chief executive, Iain McInnes, said the trust needed to work "more efficiently, with fewer positions".
The Humber Mental Health NHS Trust said it was planning to treat more patients in their homes.
Mick Pilling, who is leading a campaign to save the hospital, said it was "another nail in the coffin, another much-needed service gone."
Last November it emerged the hospital's maternity unit is to close as the local NHS trust tackles £7m of overspending.
Hospital bosses had said mothers-to-be in the town would be encouraged to opt for home births.
Now officials at the mental health trust, which runs the threatened Waters Ward in Bridlington, said home treatment for older patients would replace in-patient services.
They said the Waters Ward would close in the autumn, with beds transferring to Castle Hill Hospital at Cottingham, near Hull.
Officials said that either the Buckrose Ward at the hospital or Bartholomew House at Goole would also close, probably within three to five years.
Mr Pilling added: "Waters Ward will close in the autumn and be taken to Castle Hill by all accounts.
The mental health trust said some patients would eventually be treated at a new facility to be built in the East Riding.
The mental health trust is part of the bigger Scarborough and North East Yorkshire NHS Trust which earlier this month announced it was to axe 600 jobs - a third of its workforce - at two Yorkshire hospitals.
The trust, which runs hospitals in Scarborough and Bridlington, plans to close wards and reduce non-clinical support services to save £15m.
Union officials had said the cuts would have a "devastating" impact on patients.
The trust's chief executive, Iain McInnes, said the trust needed to work "more efficiently, with fewer positions".
Labels:
bridlington,
mental health,
NHS,
yorkshire
Monday, 23 July 2007
Hospices 'face funding struggle'
Hospices are struggling with debts as funding promised by the government has failed to materialise, reports the BBC.
More than one in four hospices is now in deficit, a study of 186 of the UK's 194 charitable hospices showed.
It comes after the government promised in its 2005 manifesto that funding for palliative care would be doubled.
But the Help the Hospices charity said charity hospice money had remained largely static. The government said funding was now being looked at.
Two thirds of the hospices in England are run by the voluntary sector, providing valuable palliative and day care support to the NHS.
The hospice movement is a unique service which has led the way in palliative care
Karen Jennings, of Unison
But the Help the Hospices study found the amount of government money hospices received as a proportion of their spending fell for the last three years.
In England, government funding now stands at 32% of the £450m expenditure on charitable hospices, having fallen from 34% in 2004 and 33% in 2005.
The rest of the funding has to come from charitable donations.
The figures also revealed the amount hospices receive varied hugely - from nothing to 62% of their spend.
Help the Hospices chief executive David Praill said: "We are asking the government to deliver Labour's election manifesto commitment to doubling the amount given for palliative care as a matter of urgency.
"Charitable hospices provide the majority of in-patient palliative care services as well as a range of day care, hospice at home, bereavement support services and training for doctors and nurses.
"We are not asking for 100% funding, but we do need the government to cover the cost of services that the NHS would otherwise have to provide.
"The donations we get from charity fundraising activities in local communities are already badly needed and cannot be stretched to cover core NHS responsibilities indefinitely as well.
"The situation will only worsen with an ageing population and more and more of us living longer with terminal illness - this issue has to be addressed now."
Unison head of health Karen Jennings said: "The hospice movement is a unique service which has led the way in palliative care.
"They receive fantastic support from many relatives who raise funds for the service, often for years after the death of a family member.
"But they cannot survive on fundraising alone."
More than one in four hospices is now in deficit, a study of 186 of the UK's 194 charitable hospices showed.
It comes after the government promised in its 2005 manifesto that funding for palliative care would be doubled.
But the Help the Hospices charity said charity hospice money had remained largely static. The government said funding was now being looked at.
Two thirds of the hospices in England are run by the voluntary sector, providing valuable palliative and day care support to the NHS.
The hospice movement is a unique service which has led the way in palliative care
Karen Jennings, of Unison
But the Help the Hospices study found the amount of government money hospices received as a proportion of their spending fell for the last three years.
In England, government funding now stands at 32% of the £450m expenditure on charitable hospices, having fallen from 34% in 2004 and 33% in 2005.
The rest of the funding has to come from charitable donations.
The figures also revealed the amount hospices receive varied hugely - from nothing to 62% of their spend.
Help the Hospices chief executive David Praill said: "We are asking the government to deliver Labour's election manifesto commitment to doubling the amount given for palliative care as a matter of urgency.
"Charitable hospices provide the majority of in-patient palliative care services as well as a range of day care, hospice at home, bereavement support services and training for doctors and nurses.
"We are not asking for 100% funding, but we do need the government to cover the cost of services that the NHS would otherwise have to provide.
"The donations we get from charity fundraising activities in local communities are already badly needed and cannot be stretched to cover core NHS responsibilities indefinitely as well.
"The situation will only worsen with an ageing population and more and more of us living longer with terminal illness - this issue has to be addressed now."
Unison head of health Karen Jennings said: "The hospice movement is a unique service which has led the way in palliative care.
"They receive fantastic support from many relatives who raise funds for the service, often for years after the death of a family member.
"But they cannot survive on fundraising alone."
Monday, 18 June 2007
Manchester: Trusts fail hygiene targets
Seven NHS trusts in Greater Manchester are failing to meet key targets aimed at tackling bugs like MRSA, reports the Manchester Evening News.
Manchester Primary Care Trust, North Cheshire Hospitals and Stockport PCT all failed to show they are meeting two hygiene standards.
Trafford PCT, Heywood, Middleton and Rochdale PCT, Bury PCT and Warrington PCT had not met, or cannot provide enough evidence to prove they are meeting the standards.
Standards include properly decontaminating reusable medical devices, such as theatre instruments.
Nationally, one in four NHS trusts are failing to hit the minimum standards for hygiene.
The news comes just weeks after the Healthcare Commission warned that failing hospitals will be served with `improvement notices'.
Today's report, issued by the Commission, is based on trusts self-reporting on whether they meet a set of 24 core government standards on care.
A total of 55 trusts including Manchester PCT and North Cheshire Hospitals had not met, or could not prove they met the standard on keeping patients safe by reducing the risk from infections like Clostridium difficile.
Forty-three trusts, including Stockport PCT and Warrington PCT, had not met, or had no data to show they met the standard on areas being clean and buildings being in good order.
A spokesperson for Manchester PCT said: "Achieving compliance is an on-going priority for the PCT.
"We have allocated additional resources and put action plans in place to ensure progress is made and monitored in those areas where we did not declare full compliance this year."
Manchester Primary Care Trust, North Cheshire Hospitals and Stockport PCT all failed to show they are meeting two hygiene standards.
Trafford PCT, Heywood, Middleton and Rochdale PCT, Bury PCT and Warrington PCT had not met, or cannot provide enough evidence to prove they are meeting the standards.
Standards include properly decontaminating reusable medical devices, such as theatre instruments.
Nationally, one in four NHS trusts are failing to hit the minimum standards for hygiene.
The news comes just weeks after the Healthcare Commission warned that failing hospitals will be served with `improvement notices'.
Today's report, issued by the Commission, is based on trusts self-reporting on whether they meet a set of 24 core government standards on care.
A total of 55 trusts including Manchester PCT and North Cheshire Hospitals had not met, or could not prove they met the standard on keeping patients safe by reducing the risk from infections like Clostridium difficile.
Forty-three trusts, including Stockport PCT and Warrington PCT, had not met, or had no data to show they met the standard on areas being clean and buildings being in good order.
A spokesperson for Manchester PCT said: "Achieving compliance is an on-going priority for the PCT.
"We have allocated additional resources and put action plans in place to ensure progress is made and monitored in those areas where we did not declare full compliance this year."
Sunday, 17 June 2007
NHS 'hygiene standards struggle'
The BBC reports today that NHS trusts in England are struggling to meet key hygiene standards, according to data submitted to the NHS watchdog.
A quarter of the trusts report they are not complying with one of the three standards relating to the hygiene code, covering areas including cleanliness.
A spokesman for Patient Concern said: "This is terrible. It is bad news for patients and shows trusts are not getting the basics right."
In total there are , covering everything from clinical effectivness to governance.
England's 394 trusts self-declare how they are doing against 24 core NHS standards, which then help determine their overall NHS rating.
The Healthcare Commission now has to verify the data by cross-checking the information against its own intelligence, audits and surveys by other organisations and through a system of targeted spot-checks.
Trusts did best in meeting standards covering professional codes of practice, whistle-blowing and openness.
There was also a rise in the number of trusts reporting they met the two standards relating to compliance with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, which issues advice on new treatments.
But with the three standards that relate to hygiene, compliance had fallen.
In particular, on reducing the risk of infection, 14% said they had failed, up from 7% last year.
A similar number said they could not say they decontaminated equipment properly - up from 12.6%.
TRUSTS FAILING ALL HYGIENE STANDARDS
Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust
Sheffield Primary Care Trust
Sutton and Merton Primary Care Trust
Wiltshire Primary Care Trust
Over one in 10 did not meet cleanliness standards either.
It meant that 99 trusts - one in four of the total - were not meeting the hygiene code.
A quarter of the trusts report they are not complying with one of the three standards relating to the hygiene code, covering areas including cleanliness.
A spokesman for Patient Concern said: "This is terrible. It is bad news for patients and shows trusts are not getting the basics right."
In total there are , covering everything from clinical effectivness to governance.
England's 394 trusts self-declare how they are doing against 24 core NHS standards, which then help determine their overall NHS rating.
The Healthcare Commission now has to verify the data by cross-checking the information against its own intelligence, audits and surveys by other organisations and through a system of targeted spot-checks.
Trusts did best in meeting standards covering professional codes of practice, whistle-blowing and openness.
There was also a rise in the number of trusts reporting they met the two standards relating to compliance with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, which issues advice on new treatments.
But with the three standards that relate to hygiene, compliance had fallen.
In particular, on reducing the risk of infection, 14% said they had failed, up from 7% last year.
A similar number said they could not say they decontaminated equipment properly - up from 12.6%.
TRUSTS FAILING ALL HYGIENE STANDARDS
Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust
Sheffield Primary Care Trust
Sutton and Merton Primary Care Trust
Wiltshire Primary Care Trust
Over one in 10 did not meet cleanliness standards either.
It meant that 99 trusts - one in four of the total - were not meeting the hygiene code.
Friday, 1 June 2007
Deadly NHS bug 'underestimated'
The BBC is reporting that thousands of cases of the hospital bug Clostridium difficile have remained hidden due to a requirement to only report cases affecting people over 65 years old.
A government suveillance scheme has required hospitals to submit numbers of cases of C difficile in people over 65 since 2004. But only since April this year must cases among all patients be included in the reports.
MP Grant Shapps obtained data from 171 NHS trusts in England, which showed there have been an extra 26,000 cases on top of the 176,450 infections reported.
C difficile is linked to twice as many deaths as MRSA, and, unlike the so-called superbug, C difficile infection rates are still on the rise. In 2006 they rose by 8% on the previous year to 55,000 infections.
A spokesman for the Department of Health said: "There is no room for complacency.
"We are clear - one avoidable infection is one too many and we are determined to ensure that the NHS has in place good hygiene and clinical procedures
How determined exactly? Are sufficient funds being invested to provide better cleaning procedures - and could it be more if the government weren't instead planning to waste billions of pounds extra on the EU?
The government might think it can get away with such poor judgement of priorities with public money. But how will MPs who vote to approve this unjustified increase in payments to the EU explain their choice to local voters who have been affected by this dangerous bug?
Especially if it's clear that more could have been done to prevent deaths, had more resources been made available.
A government suveillance scheme has required hospitals to submit numbers of cases of C difficile in people over 65 since 2004. But only since April this year must cases among all patients be included in the reports.
MP Grant Shapps obtained data from 171 NHS trusts in England, which showed there have been an extra 26,000 cases on top of the 176,450 infections reported.
C difficile is linked to twice as many deaths as MRSA, and, unlike the so-called superbug, C difficile infection rates are still on the rise. In 2006 they rose by 8% on the previous year to 55,000 infections.
A spokesman for the Department of Health said: "There is no room for complacency.
"We are clear - one avoidable infection is one too many and we are determined to ensure that the NHS has in place good hygiene and clinical procedures
How determined exactly? Are sufficient funds being invested to provide better cleaning procedures - and could it be more if the government weren't instead planning to waste billions of pounds extra on the EU?
The government might think it can get away with such poor judgement of priorities with public money. But how will MPs who vote to approve this unjustified increase in payments to the EU explain their choice to local voters who have been affected by this dangerous bug?
Especially if it's clear that more could have been done to prevent deaths, had more resources been made available.
Friday, 25 May 2007
Manchester: New debt crisis hits health trust
Mental health services in Manchester have been placed on the government's critical list - reports the Manchester Evening News.
Cash-strapped Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust which started the financial year £4.5m in debt, will have to report its financial progress to regional health bosses every fortnight.
It is the second trust in Greater Manchester to officially enter "turnaround" - a Department of Health initiative to tackle debt crisis.
MMHSCT, which has a historic debt of £1.9m and is already predicting it will be £2.5m in the red by March next year, will have to appoint an outside troubleshooter to find ways to cut spending and make savings.
New chief executive Sheila Foley said: "While we are disappointed with the decision, we are determined to use this opportunity to put the Trust into sustainable financial stability.
"We remain committed to delivering the agreed improvements to mental health services across the city."
The turnaround programme was started by the Department of Health 15 months ago.
Turnaround trusts have to produce detailed plans of how they will provide patient care and bring their finances in line.
The city's mental health services are set to undergo radical changes after a public consultation called Change In Mind.
Karen Reissmann, of the MMHSCT staff union's forum and a top member of Unison's executive, said: "Mental health nationally and certainly mental health in Manchester has been under-funded for many years, despite the obvious high need.
Cash-strapped Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust which started the financial year £4.5m in debt, will have to report its financial progress to regional health bosses every fortnight.
It is the second trust in Greater Manchester to officially enter "turnaround" - a Department of Health initiative to tackle debt crisis.
MMHSCT, which has a historic debt of £1.9m and is already predicting it will be £2.5m in the red by March next year, will have to appoint an outside troubleshooter to find ways to cut spending and make savings.
New chief executive Sheila Foley said: "While we are disappointed with the decision, we are determined to use this opportunity to put the Trust into sustainable financial stability.
"We remain committed to delivering the agreed improvements to mental health services across the city."
The turnaround programme was started by the Department of Health 15 months ago.
Turnaround trusts have to produce detailed plans of how they will provide patient care and bring their finances in line.
The city's mental health services are set to undergo radical changes after a public consultation called Change In Mind.
Karen Reissmann, of the MMHSCT staff union's forum and a top member of Unison's executive, said: "Mental health nationally and certainly mental health in Manchester has been under-funded for many years, despite the obvious high need.
Wednesday, 25 April 2007
Hospital failings allow superbugs to spread
Thousands of patients risk contracting potentially deadly superbugs because NHS hospitals are not taking basic steps to stop the spread of infection, the Daily Telegraph reports today.
Independent research by Dr Foster Research, an independent health information company, into the state of infection control at 167 NHS hospital trusts in England exposed chaotic monitoring systems and hospitals losing the battle against MRSA and other deadly infections.
Only 10 of the trusts surveyed could provide data showing that they had isolated more than 90% of individuals with MRSA. This is the level that infection control experts recommend as an essential safeguard in the battle against hospital-acquired bugs.
In half of the trusts surveyed, patients had to wait up to 72 hours for their screening results to be returned, putting thousands of others at risk of contracting an infection. And only five trusts could show that patients were screened and told whether they were infected in less than 24 hours.
The revelations come at a time when cases of C. difficile and MRSA are soaring and deaths linked to hospital superbugs have increased dramatically.
Office for National Statistics figures show that between 2004 and 2005, the number of deaths recorded as associated with MRSA rose 39%. Those that mentioned Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) rose by 69%. Mentions of C. difficile on death certificates rose from 2,247 in 2004 to 3,807 the following year, while mentions of MRSA rose from 1,168 to 1,629.
Patient groups have branded the revelations as "alarming". Michael Summers, of the Patients' Association, accused the Government of not taking the risk of MRSA seriously and blamed NHS cutbacks for the growing problem.
"Cuts in spending in the NHS have had a devastating impact on infection control. People phoning our helpline tell us that bed sheets aren't being washed and that beds are not being cleaned," he said.
"It's not good enough. The number of deaths from MRSA has been rising steadily since 1993 when 51 people died from the bug. In 2005, almost 1,700 people lost their lives from the infection."
Under-capacity in the health service was also blamed for exacerbating the problem. Countries with low rates of hospital-acquired infections, such as the Netherlands, are able to isolate infected patients because their hospitals are less crowded. Bed occupancy rates in the Netherlands are around 60% compared with more than 87% in Britain.
Yet billions of pounds that could be used to tackle this problem - a factor in the deaths of over 5,000 people in 2005 - by providing hospitals with more resources for cleaning, more beds and more isolation facilities, MPs instead plan to hand over to the EU.
Some MPs claim that the billions they want to pay the EU may not, if saved, necessarily be used for this purpose. But this is a feeble excuse for intending to approve obviously wasteful spending while public services clearly need more support.
More public money is required from somewhere and, until they can suggest another source, blocking vastly increased payments to a wasteful and audit-failing body like the EU is an obvious candidate for consideration.
So will MPs take the responsible course and vote against the EU budget deal? Or expose their supposed commitment to improving public services as nothing more than talk?
Independent research by Dr Foster Research, an independent health information company, into the state of infection control at 167 NHS hospital trusts in England exposed chaotic monitoring systems and hospitals losing the battle against MRSA and other deadly infections.
Only 10 of the trusts surveyed could provide data showing that they had isolated more than 90% of individuals with MRSA. This is the level that infection control experts recommend as an essential safeguard in the battle against hospital-acquired bugs.
In half of the trusts surveyed, patients had to wait up to 72 hours for their screening results to be returned, putting thousands of others at risk of contracting an infection. And only five trusts could show that patients were screened and told whether they were infected in less than 24 hours.
The revelations come at a time when cases of C. difficile and MRSA are soaring and deaths linked to hospital superbugs have increased dramatically.
Office for National Statistics figures show that between 2004 and 2005, the number of deaths recorded as associated with MRSA rose 39%. Those that mentioned Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) rose by 69%. Mentions of C. difficile on death certificates rose from 2,247 in 2004 to 3,807 the following year, while mentions of MRSA rose from 1,168 to 1,629.
Patient groups have branded the revelations as "alarming". Michael Summers, of the Patients' Association, accused the Government of not taking the risk of MRSA seriously and blamed NHS cutbacks for the growing problem.
"Cuts in spending in the NHS have had a devastating impact on infection control. People phoning our helpline tell us that bed sheets aren't being washed and that beds are not being cleaned," he said.
"It's not good enough. The number of deaths from MRSA has been rising steadily since 1993 when 51 people died from the bug. In 2005, almost 1,700 people lost their lives from the infection."
Under-capacity in the health service was also blamed for exacerbating the problem. Countries with low rates of hospital-acquired infections, such as the Netherlands, are able to isolate infected patients because their hospitals are less crowded. Bed occupancy rates in the Netherlands are around 60% compared with more than 87% in Britain.
Yet billions of pounds that could be used to tackle this problem - a factor in the deaths of over 5,000 people in 2005 - by providing hospitals with more resources for cleaning, more beds and more isolation facilities, MPs instead plan to hand over to the EU.
Some MPs claim that the billions they want to pay the EU may not, if saved, necessarily be used for this purpose. But this is a feeble excuse for intending to approve obviously wasteful spending while public services clearly need more support.
More public money is required from somewhere and, until they can suggest another source, blocking vastly increased payments to a wasteful and audit-failing body like the EU is an obvious candidate for consideration.
So will MPs take the responsible course and vote against the EU budget deal? Or expose their supposed commitment to improving public services as nothing more than talk?
Tuesday, 17 April 2007
MRSA risk 'rising in crowded hospitals'
Thousands of patients risk catching MRSA and other deadly superbugs because NHS hospitals are overcrowded, according to a survey reported in the Daily Telegraph today.
Figures produced by the Royal College of Nursing suggest that in the vast majority of wards the proportion of beds occupied at any one time is substantially higher than Government estimates.
Infection control experts have warned that occupancy rates should be kept below 85% to prevent the spread of MRSA and other infections such as Clostridium difficile.
But the survey suggests the average occupancy rate earlier this year was 97%, and that more than half of wards were running at 100% to meet increased patient demand and hit waiting time targets.
Speaking at the college's annual congress in Harrogate yesterday, Howard Catton, the head of policy, said: "Our report shows we have a system running very hot, with very high bed occupancy and the average length of stay down from 12 days to only nine. The number of nurses on these wards is 14% lower than it should be."
The survey of 173 general medical and general surgical wards in 84 hospitals across the UK found that 54% were running at maximum capacity in February.
Recent figures show that in 2005, a total of 3,807 people died after contracting C difficile, an increase of 69% in 12 months, and a further 1,629 died after contracting MRSA - a rise of 39% in a single year.
Prof Barry Cookson, an MRSA and infection expert at the Health Protection Agency, warned in 2004 that occupancy rates must be lowered.
He said: "We have got to get down to 85%. Patients should realise that there is a certain safety level above which we start having problems."
A health department report leaked last year showed that in hospitals with occupancy rates above 85%, MRSA infection rates were 16% above average. Those with 90% occupancy rates had MRSA 42% above average.
The health department disputed the figures, saying that the most recent occupancy figure, for 2005/06, was 84.6%, the lowest figure since 2000/01.
Figures produced by the Royal College of Nursing suggest that in the vast majority of wards the proportion of beds occupied at any one time is substantially higher than Government estimates.
Infection control experts have warned that occupancy rates should be kept below 85% to prevent the spread of MRSA and other infections such as Clostridium difficile.
But the survey suggests the average occupancy rate earlier this year was 97%, and that more than half of wards were running at 100% to meet increased patient demand and hit waiting time targets.
Speaking at the college's annual congress in Harrogate yesterday, Howard Catton, the head of policy, said: "Our report shows we have a system running very hot, with very high bed occupancy and the average length of stay down from 12 days to only nine. The number of nurses on these wards is 14% lower than it should be."
The survey of 173 general medical and general surgical wards in 84 hospitals across the UK found that 54% were running at maximum capacity in February.
Recent figures show that in 2005, a total of 3,807 people died after contracting C difficile, an increase of 69% in 12 months, and a further 1,629 died after contracting MRSA - a rise of 39% in a single year.
Prof Barry Cookson, an MRSA and infection expert at the Health Protection Agency, warned in 2004 that occupancy rates must be lowered.
He said: "We have got to get down to 85%. Patients should realise that there is a certain safety level above which we start having problems."
A health department report leaked last year showed that in hospitals with occupancy rates above 85%, MRSA infection rates were 16% above average. Those with 90% occupancy rates had MRSA 42% above average.
The health department disputed the figures, saying that the most recent occupancy figure, for 2005/06, was 84.6%, the lowest figure since 2000/01.
Sunday, 15 April 2007
Health 'should be top priority' says survey
Health should be the top priority for government, a survey has suggested - according to the BBC.
A poll of nearly 2,400 people carried out by YouGov for the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) found that health was ranked above law and order, defence, education and the environment.
A third of those questioned said they wanted to see funding maintained at current levels, while 59% said they wanted it to be increased.
Many said they feared services would be cut if this did not happen.
In total, 37% said health should be the most important spending priority, 23% law and order, 20% education, 10% environment and 2% defence.
When asked in more detail about their healthcare priorities, almost half of those surveyed ranked hospitals above other areas, such as reducing waiting times, more health services in the community, care for the elderly and public health.
So when voters see that their MP, rather than investing limited public funds in their top spending priorities, has in fact approved a 60% increase in funds - billions more pounds a year - for the audit-failing EU, that's unlikely to go down very well at all.
MPs planning to vote in favour of the EU budget deal - particularly those in marginal seats - would surely do well to bear this in mind.
A poll of nearly 2,400 people carried out by YouGov for the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) found that health was ranked above law and order, defence, education and the environment.
A third of those questioned said they wanted to see funding maintained at current levels, while 59% said they wanted it to be increased.
Many said they feared services would be cut if this did not happen.
In total, 37% said health should be the most important spending priority, 23% law and order, 20% education, 10% environment and 2% defence.
When asked in more detail about their healthcare priorities, almost half of those surveyed ranked hospitals above other areas, such as reducing waiting times, more health services in the community, care for the elderly and public health.
So when voters see that their MP, rather than investing limited public funds in their top spending priorities, has in fact approved a 60% increase in funds - billions more pounds a year - for the audit-failing EU, that's unlikely to go down very well at all.
MPs planning to vote in favour of the EU budget deal - particularly those in marginal seats - would surely do well to bear this in mind.
Friday, 6 April 2007
Superbug kills almost as many as die on roads
The Daily Telegraph reports today that deaths from the hospital superbug, Clostridium difficile, are fast approaching the number of road fatalities, an expert has said.
Dr John Starr, reader in geriatric medicine at the University of Edinburgh, says that cases of C difficile rose by 5.5% over a year while MRSA cases fell by 4.3%.
"With more than 2,200 deaths attributed to C difficile in death certificates in England and Wales, the mortality rate is fast approaching that for road traffic accidents and is now around half that for suicide," he says in the British Medical Journal.
Road deaths in 2004 were 2,915.
Dr Starr says that more than 50,000 patients over the age of 65 suffered C difficile infection in hospitals in England last year compared with around 7,000 who caught MRSA.
"Control of C difficile is difficult because, unlike MRSA, alcohol hand scrubs are ineffective and its spores are resistant to routine hospital cleaning."
He says that patients on waiting lists should be screened before they are admitted to see if they are carrying the bacterium.
Dr John Starr, reader in geriatric medicine at the University of Edinburgh, says that cases of C difficile rose by 5.5% over a year while MRSA cases fell by 4.3%.
"With more than 2,200 deaths attributed to C difficile in death certificates in England and Wales, the mortality rate is fast approaching that for road traffic accidents and is now around half that for suicide," he says in the British Medical Journal.
Road deaths in 2004 were 2,915.
Dr Starr says that more than 50,000 patients over the age of 65 suffered C difficile infection in hospitals in England last year compared with around 7,000 who caught MRSA.
"Control of C difficile is difficult because, unlike MRSA, alcohol hand scrubs are ineffective and its spores are resistant to routine hospital cleaning."
He says that patients on waiting lists should be screened before they are admitted to see if they are carrying the bacterium.
Wednesday, 4 April 2007
Oxfordshire: Trip to France 'spared me NHS wait'
A man crippled with arthritic pain went to France for a hip replacement after being told he would have to wait six months on the NHS - reports the Oxford Times.
Tony Singleton, 47, of Bagley Close in Kennington, decided to pay £6,800 to be treated at a private clinic in Abbeville, northern France, after learning he could have the operation there within a fortnight.
Mr Singleton, who had already been on the waiting list at the Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre for five months, was told at the beginning of March he would have to wait even longer.
He said: "I feel the NHS has failed me. I've worked since I was 15 years old and paid all my National Insurance contributions and when I need something, they let me down.
"There was no way I could wait. I had got to the point where I was so crippled by pain that my quality of life was nothing.
The clinic in France Mr Singleton attended is run by English firm People Logistics, who provided door-to-door collection as part of their service.
Managing director Keith Smith said: "Unfortunately there are more and more people who need joint replacement surgery.
"The NHS is failing people and we're disappointed for those that have to use our service."
The Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre has said that the current national waiting time for an orthopaedic inpatient appointment requires patients be seen within 26 weeks, or six months.
A spokesman for the trust said: "In 2005-6, no patients exceeded this target, with the exception of a handful of planned occasions."
However, as Mr Singleton was added to the waiting list in November last year, he would not have been included in these figures.
How can MPs consider rewarding the audit-failing EU with a 60% increase in payments, while people like Mr Singleton aren't getting the vital services they need and have paid for - instead having to raid their savings and pay over again.
Those MPs planning such an unjustified waste of billions of pounds of public money every year instead of investing it in the NHS - or many other useful public purposes - should think again. Or will surely face angry local voters at the next election.
Tony Singleton, 47, of Bagley Close in Kennington, decided to pay £6,800 to be treated at a private clinic in Abbeville, northern France, after learning he could have the operation there within a fortnight.
Mr Singleton, who had already been on the waiting list at the Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre for five months, was told at the beginning of March he would have to wait even longer.
He said: "I feel the NHS has failed me. I've worked since I was 15 years old and paid all my National Insurance contributions and when I need something, they let me down.
"There was no way I could wait. I had got to the point where I was so crippled by pain that my quality of life was nothing.
The clinic in France Mr Singleton attended is run by English firm People Logistics, who provided door-to-door collection as part of their service.
Managing director Keith Smith said: "Unfortunately there are more and more people who need joint replacement surgery.
"The NHS is failing people and we're disappointed for those that have to use our service."
The Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre has said that the current national waiting time for an orthopaedic inpatient appointment requires patients be seen within 26 weeks, or six months.
A spokesman for the trust said: "In 2005-6, no patients exceeded this target, with the exception of a handful of planned occasions."
However, as Mr Singleton was added to the waiting list in November last year, he would not have been included in these figures.
How can MPs consider rewarding the audit-failing EU with a 60% increase in payments, while people like Mr Singleton aren't getting the vital services they need and have paid for - instead having to raid their savings and pay over again.
Those MPs planning such an unjustified waste of billions of pounds of public money every year instead of investing it in the NHS - or many other useful public purposes - should think again. Or will surely face angry local voters at the next election.
Saturday, 31 March 2007
Superbug death was 'diabolical'
The widow of a man who fell victim to a superbug that has claimed 17 lives at a Norfolk hospital yesterday described his death as "diabolical" - reports the Sunday Telegraph.
Great-grandfather Leslie Burton-Pye, 74, was infected with Clostridium difficile in January while visiting the James Paget Hospital in Gorleston for a blood transfusion.
He fell ill soon after and was admitted to the hospital where he stayed until released in mid-March. He was re-admitted last Sunday and died the next day.
Yesterday, his widow, Mavis, 67, said: "I wish I hadn't let him go in for the transfusion. He had health problems before then but he lived with them and was okay up to the point where he went to hospital. It is heartbreaking."
Mrs Burton-Pye, who lived with her husband in the Norfolk Broads town of Acle, added: "He had just gone into hospital for some blood and picked this bug up. It is absolutely diabolical that he caught this thing on just a routine visit. I just can't believe he has gone. It won't sink in."
She said Mr Burton-Pye's family - including five children, nine grandchildren and two great-grandchildren - had been devastated by his death.
Bosses at the hospital, which has been infected with the virulent "027" strain of the superbug, admit it could take 12 weeks to get the outbreak under control.
The 17 deaths, almost all of people aged 65 and over, have occurred since December. Sixteen more patients have been infected but survived.
The hospital has invested an extra £400,000 to tackle the outbreak but Wendy Slaney, the acting chief executive of the hospital, said it could take months to bring under control.
Perhaps the problem could be solved more quickly and more deaths avoided, if the trust had more money to invest in tackling it.
Sadly local MP Tony Wright intends to vote to improve government plans to hand 60% extra - £2.5bn more a year - to the EU ... a body that hasn't had its accounts approved for 12 years in a row.
What a waste of money, some of which could have been put to better use in his own constituency. A choice that's likely to be very hard to justify to local voters come the next election, when we point out such irresponsible actions with public funds.
Great-grandfather Leslie Burton-Pye, 74, was infected with Clostridium difficile in January while visiting the James Paget Hospital in Gorleston for a blood transfusion.
He fell ill soon after and was admitted to the hospital where he stayed until released in mid-March. He was re-admitted last Sunday and died the next day.
Yesterday, his widow, Mavis, 67, said: "I wish I hadn't let him go in for the transfusion. He had health problems before then but he lived with them and was okay up to the point where he went to hospital. It is heartbreaking."
Mrs Burton-Pye, who lived with her husband in the Norfolk Broads town of Acle, added: "He had just gone into hospital for some blood and picked this bug up. It is absolutely diabolical that he caught this thing on just a routine visit. I just can't believe he has gone. It won't sink in."
She said Mr Burton-Pye's family - including five children, nine grandchildren and two great-grandchildren - had been devastated by his death.
Bosses at the hospital, which has been infected with the virulent "027" strain of the superbug, admit it could take 12 weeks to get the outbreak under control.
The 17 deaths, almost all of people aged 65 and over, have occurred since December. Sixteen more patients have been infected but survived.
The hospital has invested an extra £400,000 to tackle the outbreak but Wendy Slaney, the acting chief executive of the hospital, said it could take months to bring under control.
Perhaps the problem could be solved more quickly and more deaths avoided, if the trust had more money to invest in tackling it.
Sadly local MP Tony Wright intends to vote to improve government plans to hand 60% extra - £2.5bn more a year - to the EU ... a body that hasn't had its accounts approved for 12 years in a row.
What a waste of money, some of which could have been put to better use in his own constituency. A choice that's likely to be very hard to justify to local voters come the next election, when we point out such irresponsible actions with public funds.
Labels:
c difficile,
gorleston,
great yarmouth,
hospitals,
NHS,
norfolk
Tuesday, 13 March 2007
'Screen all for MRSA' experts say
Researchers at Nottingham University have recommended that all patients coming in to hospitals for operations should be tested for the MRSA superbug, according to the BBC.
Experts say that this could cut MRSA rates to the Scandinavian levels of 2% within six years, compared to the UK's current rate of 44%.
They have also developed a test which would identify MRSA in all its forms within hours. The test currently used by NHS trusts to check if someone has basic MRSA takes up to three days.
The Department of Health has itself acknowledged that there should be "universal screening" of patients going into hospital, also saying "Tackling health care acquired infections is a top priority for the government and the health service."
So why isn't this happening? The reason is that universal screening for MRSA means higher costs, and the choice has been left to individual NHS trusts to "determine the most appropriate initial approach to screening for their patient population."
Though with many NHS trusts struggling to recover debts and having to make cuts to services, taking on extra costs - no matter how much the outcome may help patients - is a remote possibility.
Of course, we have a helpful suggestion for where vast amounts of wasted money could be diverted from, to pay for universal MRSA testing and saving unnecessary loss of life.
Bizarrely some MPs seem to think that the audit-failing EU deserves those billions more.
Experts say that this could cut MRSA rates to the Scandinavian levels of 2% within six years, compared to the UK's current rate of 44%.
They have also developed a test which would identify MRSA in all its forms within hours. The test currently used by NHS trusts to check if someone has basic MRSA takes up to three days.
The Department of Health has itself acknowledged that there should be "universal screening" of patients going into hospital, also saying "Tackling health care acquired infections is a top priority for the government and the health service."
So why isn't this happening? The reason is that universal screening for MRSA means higher costs, and the choice has been left to individual NHS trusts to "determine the most appropriate initial approach to screening for their patient population."
Though with many NHS trusts struggling to recover debts and having to make cuts to services, taking on extra costs - no matter how much the outcome may help patients - is a remote possibility.
Of course, we have a helpful suggestion for where vast amounts of wasted money could be diverted from, to pay for universal MRSA testing and saving unnecessary loss of life.
Bizarrely some MPs seem to think that the audit-failing EU deserves those billions more.
Friday, 2 March 2007
Funding row over sight loss drug
Elderly patients may be losing their sight because some health trusts are refusing to fund a specific drug, a BBC report has revealed.
Primary care trusts are refusing to let consultants prescribe a drug that can save people's vision.
Trials have shown the licensed drug Lucentis is effective in treating "wet" age-related macular degeneration (AMD) - a condition affecting the ability to see fine detail and colour.
AMD develops quickly and can cause major sight loss in a matter of weeks. But it can respond to treatment in the early stages.
Some trusts are still waiting for clinical guidance from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) before funding it, but it is not due until September. Yet the government had said it is unacceptable for trusts to refuse treatment simply because the guidance does not yet exist.
In Reading, Bournemouth, Poole and Oxford the drug's use is not funded at all, while in Southampton, Portsmouth and Salisbury trusts say funding is only considered on a case-by-case basis.
A report published by the Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) claims that 90% of all primary care trusts are refusing to pay for the drug. Steve Winyard, from the RNIB, said:
"We're hearing from more and more people who have been told that they can benefit from the treatment but that their hospital is refusing to help them.
"So they are faced with that awful choice of having to raise cash, otherwise they will go blind."
Professor Andrew Lotery, a lead ophthalmologist based at Southampton General Hospital, said he was angry that some patients were being forced to pay for the treatment.
He said: "The National Health Service, as I understand it, should be free at the point of access and there shouldn't be a postcode lottery. So I'm very keen for these drugs to become available on the NHS as soon as possible."
Primary care trusts are refusing to let consultants prescribe a drug that can save people's vision.
Trials have shown the licensed drug Lucentis is effective in treating "wet" age-related macular degeneration (AMD) - a condition affecting the ability to see fine detail and colour.
AMD develops quickly and can cause major sight loss in a matter of weeks. But it can respond to treatment in the early stages.
Some trusts are still waiting for clinical guidance from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) before funding it, but it is not due until September. Yet the government had said it is unacceptable for trusts to refuse treatment simply because the guidance does not yet exist.
In Reading, Bournemouth, Poole and Oxford the drug's use is not funded at all, while in Southampton, Portsmouth and Salisbury trusts say funding is only considered on a case-by-case basis.
A report published by the Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) claims that 90% of all primary care trusts are refusing to pay for the drug. Steve Winyard, from the RNIB, said:
"We're hearing from more and more people who have been told that they can benefit from the treatment but that their hospital is refusing to help them.
"So they are faced with that awful choice of having to raise cash, otherwise they will go blind."
Professor Andrew Lotery, a lead ophthalmologist based at Southampton General Hospital, said he was angry that some patients were being forced to pay for the treatment.
He said: "The National Health Service, as I understand it, should be free at the point of access and there shouldn't be a postcode lottery. So I'm very keen for these drugs to become available on the NHS as soon as possible."
Sunday, 25 February 2007
Half of hospitals delay surgery to save cash
Almost half of NHS hospitals across England are now deliberately delaying operations to save money, according to a Sunday Telegraph today.
"Minimum waiting times" have been imposed by at least 43% of Acute NHS Trusts, a survey for Channel 4's Dispatches programme found. Treatments are often postponed for more than 20 weeks, despite staff and equipment being available.
The survey shows that "minimum waiting times" are, in some hospitals, approaching 28 weeks - the government's much-vaunted maximum wait for in-patient treatment.
The delays were described as "unnecessary" and "crazy" by James Johnson, the chairman of the British Medical Association.
The latest accounts, released last week, show an NHS deficit of £1.3 billion in the third quarter of this financial year, up from £1.2 billion during the previous thee months.
During the same period, the proportion of primary care trusts in the red rose from 39 to 47%.
When are the government going to stop wasting such vast amounts on the EU, pay off these NHS deficits with the money saved, and achieve much more still with the remaining multi-billion pound annual saving?
It's quite simply a 'no brainer'. It's perfectly possible for European countries to co-operate together on the issues that affect us all, without paying huge amounts of money into a central, very leaky EU budget - at the expense of essential public services.
"Minimum waiting times" have been imposed by at least 43% of Acute NHS Trusts, a survey for Channel 4's Dispatches programme found. Treatments are often postponed for more than 20 weeks, despite staff and equipment being available.
The survey shows that "minimum waiting times" are, in some hospitals, approaching 28 weeks - the government's much-vaunted maximum wait for in-patient treatment.
The delays were described as "unnecessary" and "crazy" by James Johnson, the chairman of the British Medical Association.
The latest accounts, released last week, show an NHS deficit of £1.3 billion in the third quarter of this financial year, up from £1.2 billion during the previous thee months.
During the same period, the proportion of primary care trusts in the red rose from 39 to 47%.
When are the government going to stop wasting such vast amounts on the EU, pay off these NHS deficits with the money saved, and achieve much more still with the remaining multi-billion pound annual saving?
It's quite simply a 'no brainer'. It's perfectly possible for European countries to co-operate together on the issues that affect us all, without paying huge amounts of money into a central, very leaky EU budget - at the expense of essential public services.
Thursday, 22 February 2007
Wimbledon: Bereavement help slashed
The Wimbledon Guardian reports that a counselling service which has helped hundreds of bereaved people each year is due to close because funding has been withdrawn by health bosses.
The Sutton & Merton bereavement service has been helping those who have lost loved ones, sometimes in tragic circumstances, for 25 years and sees those who have both referred themselves and been referred by their GP.
Though the annual cost of running the service is just £36,000, providing five part-time staff supported by an army of volunteers, the Sutton & Merton Primary Care Trust has refused further funding in an effort to cut costs.
- Article contributed by: R.A. C-H, Wimbledon
The Sutton & Merton bereavement service has been helping those who have lost loved ones, sometimes in tragic circumstances, for 25 years and sees those who have both referred themselves and been referred by their GP.
Though the annual cost of running the service is just £36,000, providing five part-time staff supported by an army of volunteers, the Sutton & Merton Primary Care Trust has refused further funding in an effort to cut costs.
- Article contributed by: R.A. C-H, Wimbledon
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
