Monthly Archives: December 2013

Hospital patients to have named doctors, Jeremy Hunt declares

The current “collusion to avoid responsibility” is addressed by Miranda Prynne, who reports for The Telegraph 24th December 2013 (it would seem amazing to an outsider from a Private or Insurance based system that this should not have been the case):

Hospital patients to have named doctors, Jeremy Hunt declares

Patients will have named doctors and nurses listed above their hospital beds who will act as “champions” for their care, the health secretary has revealed

“Hospital patients will be given a named doctor and nurse who will be listed above their bed so they know “where the buck stops”, the Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt confirmed today.

The move set to take effect in 2014 is designed to ensure staff take personal responsibility for their patients and prevent a repeat of the Mid-Staffordshire NHS scandal.

Last month The Telegraph first revealed the planswhich place a new “duty of candour” on healthcare professionals, who will be obliged to disclose safety errors and near-misses.

Under the changes medics will also receive lighter penalties for errors if they admit to them while NHS trusts who are found to have covered up failings will be forced to pay all or part of related compensation claims, instead of being covered by a national insurance scheme.

Writing in the Daily Mailtoday, Mr Hunt confirmed the changes are to go ahead in the New Year, in line with key recommendations of the £13 million Francis inquiry into the deaths of hundreds of patients at Mid Staffs.

He said: “A human touch can make all the difference.

“A name you know and a face you trust to guide you throughout your stay can transform your experience…..”

Of interest: The Collusion of anonymity.

Can my doctor be my Facebook friend?

Can my doctor be my Facebook friend?

The doctor-patient relationship can be a close one – but in this week’s Scrubbing Up column, Dr Naeem Nazem of the MDDUS asks – can that relationship be extended into social media?

“Whether you embrace it or not, the vast majority of people use social media as part of their everyday lives.

 

Recent figures show there are a staggering 24 million – and counting – active Facebook users in the UK, while one in four people (15 million) have Twitter accounts.

 

There are undoubted benefits as social media offers a platform for doctors to network effectively, share views and develop their own knowledge and expertise.

 

For patients engaging with social media, it can educate and raise awareness by giving them greater access to healthcare information.

 

But if you would trust your doctor with your life, could you be their Facebook friend?

‘Blurring boundaries’

On the face of it, it doesn’t seem like an unreasonable question – or request.

 

However, patients interacting with their doctors on social media may inadvertently create an uncomfortable and awkward situation.

 

It also risks blurring the boundaries in the doctor-patient relationship which could impact on the quality of care they receive.

We have encountered a range of cases where doctors have sought advice from us regarding social media issues, from critical or abusive posts from patients to hate campaigns.”

Patients should consider that doctors are bound by guidelines…..”

Hypocritical Politicians – and their lack of courage compared to the BMA

In the Telegraph Laura Donnelly on 23rd August 2013 reports the BMA position in defense of its decision to offer staff Private Medical Insurance.

BMA accused of hypocrisy after offering private insurance (PMI) to all staff

The British Medical association has been accused of hypocrisy after offering private medical insurance to all its staff, (Private Commissioning) despite opposing Government reforms to create a more competitive market in healthcare.

There will always be hypocrisy in Health Care until we have leaders with the vision to open the debate properly. Is it more important to make utilitarian decisions for the many than to make every decision perfect for the individual? And should the debate be open (rationing)? When it comes to staff, the BMA showed  it had the courage and integrity needed, and has every right to make this decision to offer PMI. What is more important is why they thought they needed to make the offer….It is now time for the health boards and PCTs to have the courage to reveal how many of their directors have PMI, so that their public can question why..

And hypocrisy is not confined to Hospitals, Trade Unions or National Politicians.

Kirsty Buchannon and Matthew Davies report in The Express on August 4th 2013:

Civic ‘hypocrisy’ on public health

TOWN halls with a duty to improve public health are ploughing hundreds of millions of pounds into international companies selling alcohol and cigarettes.

The Mail Nick Craven reports 26th October 2013, following a number of charities accusing Mr Hunt of Hypocrisy over care of the elderly. He may be justified on utilitarian principles but we have not heard the debate…, and he has not had the courage to open it..

Norovirus outbreak at Wrexham Maelor hospital: three wards still closed

The Daily Post By Eryl Crump reports 23rd December 2013:

“Norovirus outbreak at Wrexham Maelor hospital: three wards still closed

 

Vomiting bug first shut wards on Friday

Wrexham Maelor hospital – Phil Noble

Three wards at the Wrexham Maelor Hospital remain closed after an outbreak of a sickness and diarrhoea bug.

An infection control team are visiting each of the wards and are expected to confirm later if the wards can reopen or not.

A Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board (BCUHB) spokesman said the wards that have been symptom-free for 48 hours will be able to re-open once they’ve had extra cleaning.

At the end of last week BCUHB said 11 patients had experienced symptoms of the bug and urged people not to bring babies or young people on to the wards…..”

Both this and the previous posting on Bristol Children’s Hospital are further evidence of implosion. Watch for Board Resignations…

Senior NHS doctors who refuse to work weekends face the sack

Sophie Borland reports in The Mail 15th December 2013:

Senior NHS doctors who refuse to work weekends face the sack: Hospitals with poor records could also face fines of up to £12

  • NHS’s top doctor said system ‘not built around patient convenience’
  • Professor Sir Bruce Keough wants to introduce penalties for hospitals where patients experience poor care at weekends
  • Follows research showing lives lost needlessly because of shortage of senior doctors on Saturdays and Sundays

This would be fine – if we had enough doctors. We don’t. Poor manpower planning has let to a 10 year lead-in shortage, and the only way for administrators to respond to the “knee jerk” response from the Minister is to import doctors from other countries, usually those who least need to lose their medical professionals…. I will be interested to see who is staffing the GP posts in the Welsh Valleys in 5 year’s time, when the current 1970s imports are retired. Plus ca change…. It is unethical to ration by deliberate undercapacity, and denying British students with the desire and the ability, to be doctors when they are so needed.

How can feedback change the NHS? – discussion roundup in The Guardian and BMJ

There is no comment on NHSreality and the urgency of the need for change … but these group discussions are a good start.

The BMA invites younger doctors to take part in a discussion group.

The Guardian has an interesting discussion group around the Health Services….Sarah Johnson theguardian.com, Friday 20 December 2013 summarises:

The themes of the chosen discussions are listed below:

What can whistleblowers expect when they raise concerns?

What can we do to improve NHS culture?

How can feedback influence the NHS?

What is being done?

What practical steps can be taken to encourage and instil a duty of candour in hospitals?

NHS chief admits to dismay at Jeremy Hunt’s meddling – but thinks the system will “cope”!

If we are ever to get more than an adequate Regional Health Service we need to aspire to quality, and to have the tools to achieve that quality. The rules for the various ministers for the “no rationing” Health Services they run prohibit the actions needed. The system is not coping now and certainly wont cope over the holiday period.

Daniel Boffey, policy editor at The Observer, Saturday 21 December 2013 reports:

NHS chief admits to dismay at Jeremy Hunt’s meddling

NHS England chairman Sir Malcolm Grant reveals frustration at health secretary’s attempts to micro-manage service
“Sir Malcolm Grant, chairman of NHS England, has revealed his frustration at attempts by the health secretary, Jeremy Hunt, to micro-manage Britain’s health service.Grant said politicians should stop meddling in the NHS at a time when clinicians were supposed to have been put in charge under recent reforms, and admitted fighting with Hunt over attempts to interfere through a detailed blueprint called the NHS mandate, which was published this year. Grant also revealed that he had been forced to block ministers’ attempts to punish clinicians who failed to meet certain care standards by reducing their budgets.

Grant, a former provost at University College London, said: “I am a staunch believer that the NHS is one of the finest social institutions in the world and the people who make it that are the frontline staff. I think the way we design the structure to incentivise people is right, and to take money away and penalise poor performance is not the best way to get the best out of people.”

He denied rumours he had considered quitting his role over his battles with Hunt, in particular over the NHS mandate, saying: “That would have been an abdication of responsibility. We had, shall we say, some really difficult discussions, which is absolutely right, it is what you would expect.”

In a wide-ranging interview with the Observer to launch a new era for the NHS, Grant also claimed to be “quietly confident” that the service would cope with what is expected to be its busiest winter. He admitted to being surprised by the record number of people attending A&E departments in recent weeks. The “big uncertainty”would arise if there was a major change in the weather, but he said the system “will cope”…….

Do A&E waiting time targets matter?

The implication from the recent report on waiting times, and the fact that even with the Minister phoning there has been no improvement, indicates that Chairman and CEOs are sideliningn the minister – colluding to ignore him. I wonder if they will agree to interviews with NHSreality when they resign or get the “heave ho” and their golden handshakes? Oh, I forget, they need to keep quiet or they wont get a gong…

The Guardian on Friday 20 December 2013 reports:

A&E targets missed by hospitals for second week running

Latest figures show 95% target of patients being treated within four hours at casualty was not attained again
Hospitals have failed to hit the A&E target for the second week running as winter pressures set in, according to the latest figures.Data from NHS England shows 94.8% of people were treated within four hours of arriving at A&E against a 95% target.

The total is the same as last week and suggests winter pressures on the health service are starting to take hold.

The target is regularly missed by hospitals during the winter months due to factors such as more viruses circulating and higher admissions among older people.

The figures cover all centres – major A&Es, smaller minor injury units and NHS urgent care centres. Waiting times are the longest in the major A&E departments, where only 92.2% were seen within four hours.

Two-thirds of the 144 trusts with major units are missing the target, while major units have been below target since July. The data also shows that the number of delays of more than 30 minutes in ambulances being able to hand over patients to A&E stands at 4,913…..”

If, by reckless driving, I could have as many accidents in my car as I chose, and there was no deductible and no “no claims bonus” I might well drive more recklessly…..

If co-payments were introduced, as in New Zealand, the attendances at GPs and in A%E would fall, and the quality of care and morale would rise. Time for action Ministers: get on with it and introduce co-payments.

NHS executives rehired as consultants after payoff

The Times’ Lucy Fisher, & Chris Smyth 17th December 2013 report:

NHS executives rehired as consultants after payoff

“Two senior NHS managers who received big payoffs have been given lucrative consultancy contracts costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of pounds, sparking fresh criticism of a “revolving door culture” in the health service.

Sir David Nicholson, chief executive of NHS England, will be questioned by MPs today about why executives were made redundant only to be re-employed as consultants months later. A consultancy firm run by two former executives at NHS London, which employs one other NHS manager and lists five former NHS staff as associates, has been given four contracts with local health trusts, The Times has discovered.

Dame Ruth Carnall, the former chief executive of the NHS, herself criticised a system in which she runs the consultancy while drawing an NHS pension from a £2.2 million pot. Ministers paid £171 million to make managers redundant when they abolished 161 health bodies, yet Dame Ruth said the new NHS structure was so frustratingly complex that bosses had to rehire staff to recreate some of the management systems that had been swept away.

Last month The Times revealed that a married couple who were both NHS managers received redundancy payoffs totalling £1 million before being rehired three months later. They were among dozens of executives who received payoffs of more than £100,000, many of whom were later re-employed.

Dame Ruth runs CarnallFarrar with Hannah Farrar, a former colleague from NHS London. Ms Farrar, 33, whose salary was more than £140,000 a year, was paid more than £115,000 in redundancy when the organisation was abolished in March.

Teresa Moss, who received a £130,000 payoff from NHS London, also works with the company, as do two other former health service managers who left the NHS this year. Only Dame Ruth and Ms Farrar have worked on the consultancy’s NHS contracts so far.

In partnership with McKinsey, the company has a £1.5 million contract to link up health and social care in East Cheshire. CarnallFarrar also has contracts with the NHS in Manchester, West London and Brighton. The company would not reveal the values of those deals.

Sir David will be questioned about the deals by MPs on the Health Select Committee today. At a previous appearance he defended Dame Ruth as “extraordinarily talented”.

Charlotte Leslie, a Tory member of the committee, said: “In any other area it would be absolutely extraordinary what goes on, but in the NHS it seems anything goes. They write their own rules to suit what they want.”

Rosie Cooper, a Labour member of the committee, said of managers who received redundancy payoffs before being brought back: “Some former executives are raking it in from the NHS hand over fist after having left. It looks like there is a ‘charmed circle’ – once you’re in it, you’re set up for good.”

Although Dame Ruth is drawing her pension early and indicated that she had received a lump sum, she said she had waived a redundancy payoff and criticised reforms which she said had set back crucial work on improving the health system.

“We loved our jobs and wanted to carry on making what we believed were profound improvements to health services in London,” she said. “This work was simply cut off whilst we were obliged to spend our time dismantling the infrastructure of our organisations … A lot of talented people were lost to the NHS and so as new organisations struggle to get to grips with a level of complexity that they cannot find their way through, they seek help.”

Ms Farrar said: “I absolutely loved my job and I worked exceedingly hard for the public service and got treated extremely poorly and got made redundant. I would have liked to have done another job and there wasn’t one … I didn’t earn a penny until the end of September.

“I was completely stressed and worried that I was going to run out of money and not be able to pay my bills. I don’t think there’s anything improper in the way that I’ve behaved.”

Neoonicotinoids / acetamiprid and imidacloprid. Alert issued on two commonly used crop pesticides which may damage the brains of children and unborn babies

As a beekeeper and a former fisherman (before the fish all disappeared) and founder member of Pembrokeshire Rivers Trust, I have been active in approaching elected representatives regarding the environment. It is time legislation around monitoring and licensing more resembled that for human beings taking drugs. Our environment is being degraded rapidly (see the State of Nature report) but there is a collusion of anonymity with regard to progressing the changes. There is plenty of evidence

that without more draconian legislation, farmers and farming practice will not change in time to make a difference. There is conflicting evidence for bees.. with a British report failing to appreciate the risk of doing nothing being overruled by the EU… thank goodness. I have asked my EU representative to look into changing agricultural chemical legislation, but don’t expect any action. I will let you know his response as an update when it comes.

The Mail’s Sean Poulter on 17th December 2013 reports:

Alert issued on two commonly used crop pesticides which may damage the brains of children and unborn babies

“A safety watchdog has issued an alert about two food crop pesticides, which may damage the brains of babies in the womb and children.

The suspect chemicals are used around the world on farms growing grapes, strawberries, lettuce, tomatoes, tea and oranges.

They are part of a new group of pesticides called neonicotinoids, which are also used in some flea treatments for cats and dogs.

Experts at the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) have found there is good evidence that they can damage the developing human nervous system – particularly the brain.

The harmful effects on brain development were similar to those caused by nicotine found in tobacco.

Such a finding suggests these chemicals are a particular threat to developing babies and children by damaging their ability to learn, which could limit their achievements in school and later life…..”