NHS news review

Spread the love

The Guardian reveals the extent of NHS cuts under the ConDem coalition government.

GPs are striking patients off their waiting lists. There will be an incentive for GPs to strike ill and consequently more expensive patients off their lists. While the vast majority of GPs are very good and concerned with the needs and welfare of patients, some are not.

Conservative election poster 2010

A few recent news articles about the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat (Conservative) coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.

Revealed: how NHS cuts are really affecting the young, old and infirm | Society | The Guardian

Services slashed affect patients on frontline such as pregnant women and elderly despite assurances they would be protected

Birth centres are closing, patients are being denied pain-relieving drugs and leaflets advising parents how to prevent cot death have been scrapped because of NHS cuts which are increasingly restricting services to patients, evidence gathered by the Guardian reveals.

The NHS’s £20bn savings drive also means new mothers receive fewer visits from health visitors, support for problem drinkers is being reduced and families are no longer being given an NHS advice book on bringing up their baby.

People with diabetes and leg ulcers are seeing less of the district nurses who help them manage their condition; specialists delivering psychological therapies are under threat and a growing number of hospitals are reducing the number of nurses and midwives to balance their books.

The disclosure that the savings drive is affecting so many different areas of NHS care has prompted claims that pledges by the prime minister and the health secretary, Andrew Lansley, that the frontline would be protected despite the NHS’s tightening financial squeeze cannot be trusted. One of David Cameron’s election pledges was: “I’ll cut the deficit, not the NHS.”

Inquiries by the Guardian into the impact of the quest to deliver £20bn of “efficiency savings” in the NHS in England by 2015 also shows that walk-in centres are closing and anti-obesity programmes are being scaled back and hospitals reducing the number of nurses and midwives they employ, despite rising demand for healthcare and an ongoing baby boom.

Katherine Murphy, chief executive of the Patients Association, said: “Andrew Lansley promised the NHS cuts to save the £20bn would be in bureaucracy and waste and would not come at the expense of the frontline. But the evidence we are getting on a daily basis is that the impact is on the patient and frontline services.”

“Ministerial promises aren’t being kept. We are getting the complete opposite of what we were promised. We were promised no cuts to frontline services and no impact on the patient’s journey. Instead we are getting cuts in many, many services and the impact on the patient is huge.”
…

Thousands of patients struck off by their GPs – Health News, Health & Families – The Independent

Family doctors are adopting a zero-tolerance approach to patients who displease them by striking them off practice lists, in breach of NHS regulations.

The tough “one strike and you’re out” approach led to a 6 per cent rise in complaints to the Health Service Ombudsman about patient removals last year, which accounted for more than one in five of all complaints about GPs.

In one particularly stark case, a terminally ill woman was struck off a GP practice’s list after her daughter changed the battery on a device delivering an anti-sickness drug instead of waiting for the district nurse to change it for her. The revelations come in a highly critical report which lambasts the NHS for its failure to deal adequately with patient complaints.

Overall, the NHS paid out £500,000 in compensation to patients for poor complaint handling by staff, following investigations by the Ombudsman, Ann Abraham. “The NHS is still not dealing adequately with the most straightforward matters. Minor disputes over unanswered telephones or mix-ups over appointments can end up with the Ombudsman because of knee-jerk responses by NHS staff and poor complaint handling,” Ms Abraham said.

GPs have always had the right to strike patients off their lists, which reciprocates the right of patients to switch GPs. But the rules require doctors to issue a warning and discuss matters with the patient before the axe falls, except in cases of aggression or abuse.

The finding that some doctors are acting precipitately highlights the vulnerability of patients at a time when GPs are set to acquire major new powers under the Health and Social Care Bill currently going through the Lords. Ms Abraham warned: “As GPs prepare to take on greater responsibility for commissioning patient services, some are failing to handle even the most basic complaints appropriately.”

In the case of the terminally ill woman, a district nurse reported the incident to the practice who discussed it with her daughter. The practice decided “the doctor-patient relationship with the family had broken down” and removed not only the daughter, but also her sister and their mother from the practice list. The family was given no warning of the practice’s intention, nor an opportunity to respond to it, as required by NHS regulations. The practice removed the women’s terminally ill mother even though she had played no part in the disagreement.

Following the Ombudsman’s inquiries, the practice apologised and drew up plans to avoid a repeat. Ms Abraham said: “In the cases we have seen, GPs have applied zero-tolerance policies without listening to and understanding their patients or considering individual circumstances. Decisions to remove a patient from their GP’s list can be unfair and disproportionate, and can leave entire families without access to primary healthcare.”
…

27/11/13 Having received a takedown notice from the Independent newspaper for a different posting, I have reviewed this article which links to an article at the Independent’s website in order to attempt to ensure conformance with copyright laws.

I consider this posting to comply with copyright laws since
a. Only a small portion of the original article has been quoted satisfying the fair use criteria, and / or
b. This posting satisfies the requirements of a derivative work.

Please be assured that this blog is a non-commercial blog (weblog) which does not feature advertising and has not ever produced any income.

dizzy

Post author:dizzy
Post published:18 October 2011
Post category:NHS politics
Post comments:0 Comments

NHS news review

Spread the love

Prime Minister David Cameron may become known as the man who destroyed the NHS.

NHS spending cuts put babies at risk

Private sector supports Clinical Commissioning Groups.

GPs concerned that they may lose maternity pay

Conservative election poster 2010

A few recent news articles about the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat (Conservative) coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.

New Statesman – NHS reform is a never-ending nightmare for Cameron

The Prime Minister could end up with a reputation as the man who broke the NHS.

The NHS bill cleared a legislative hurdle in the Lords this week . But that doesn’t really solve any of the political problems facing the government’s reforms. Of those problems, one of the biggest is that the coalition doesn’t seem to have a clear grasp of why Andrew Lansley’s plans are causing so much difficulty.

The one thing everyone can agree on is that the plans have been appallingly presented. Lansley cooked them up in the Department of Health without much input or scrutiny from Downing Street. (So blindsided was the prime minister that the episode triggered a whole re-organisation of the Number 10 policy operation earlier this year.) According to one senior civil servant at the heart of the operation, when Cameron was first presented with Lansley’s plan he skimmed the introduction and then turned to his aides in shock and disbelief and said “have you read this stuff?!” He had, until then, had no idea of the scale of what was being planned.

There was a moment, towards the end of January, when a u-turn was still an option. But Cameron feared looking weak by abandoning such a huge public sector policy drive – and, reasonably enough, worried that dropping the reforms would implicitly confirm voters’ suspicions that the Tories had some hidden agenda on health. A u-turn would make it look as if they had been rumbled. The way senior figures in government tell the story, Cameron’s foot hovered between the brake and the accelerator, finally choosing the latter. That now looks like a huge mistake.

The essential miscalculation was the PM’s assumption that if he personally threw some weight behind the cause – deploying the powers of persuasion in which he has considerable confidence – the public mood might shift. Of course, the Conservatives did not count on a Lib Dem backlash, sanctioned from the top of the party as a device to “differentiate” the junior coalition partner (fearful of losing its identity) over an issue of famous toxicity to the Tories. Some of the Lib Dem turbulence around the NHS earlier this year was principled objection to the reforms but some is retaliation for the Tories’ personal attacks on Nick Clegg during the referendum campaign on the alternative vote. The compromise package that ended up before the Lords this week was therefore a mangled monster consisting of the original Lansley plan with heaps of ad hoc Lib Dem caveats, brakes, disruptions and supposed safeguards.

And there lies the government’s problem. The reform it is now trying to sell is the expression of Westminster political choreography and not a coherent response to the needs of the health service. Everyone in the NHS knows it and voters can sense it.
…

NHS cuts putting vulnerable babies at risk, says charity | Society | The Guardian

Special care baby charity Bliss warns about qualifications of some nurses and midwives in hospital neonatal units

More than half of England’s specialist baby care units do not meet the government’s minimum standards and are putting the most vulnerable babies at risk, a charity warned on Monday.

Bliss, a special care baby charity, said staff cuts in a third of England’s 172 neonatal units were “significantly affecting the care of premature and sick babies”.

Minimum standards set by the Department of Health require 70% of nurses and midwives in neonatal units to be qualified in specialist care, Bliss said, but more than half had failed to meet this target. Last year, the charity said 1,150 extra nurses would be needed to reach minimum standards, but a recent freedom of information request by the charity found 140 posts had been cut.

In addition, it said that while 450 nurses needed to receive extra training to meet the department’s standards, one in 10 units said they were struggling to release staff for training because of budget cuts.

Andy Cole, chief executive at Bliss, said: “The government’s assurances that frontline services would not be affected by changes in the NHS is not true for these most vulnerable patients. The government and the NHS must take responsibility now and ensure our tiniest and sickest babies receive the highest standard of care at this critical time in their lives.”

Bliss reported that about 20% of neonatal units were likely to make further cuts to their workforce in the next 12 months, through redundancies, vacancy freezes and down-banding posts.

Janet Davies, executive director of nursing at the Royal College of Nursing, said the findings were deeply shocking and called for a stronger strategy.

“At a time when extra nurses are needed to meet even the most basic standards of neonatal care, some [NHS] trusts are making reckless cuts to posts, which will undoubtedly have an impact on the care of premature and sick babies,” she said.

“Sadly, this is a reflection on what is happening throughout the NHS, where we know that 40,000 posts are earmarked to be lost. It is critical that hospitals have the right numbers of specialist nurses, who can provide one-to-one care to premature babies and support for families at an extremely stressful time in their lives. Equally, a properly funded strategy is now urgently needed to recruit and retain more of these specialist nurses.”
…

31 commissioning groups sign landmark deal with private firms to provide ‘organisational support’ – newsarticle-content – Pulse

Clinical commissioning groups representing several thousand GPs across London have signed a multi-million pound deal with private consultants handpicked by NHS bosses to help support the rollout of GP commissioning.

The £7m landmark deal has seen 31 CCGs sign contracts for a programme of ‘intensive organisational support’ for commissioning from the likes of KPMG, Pricewaterhouse Coopers, Capita and McKinsey, which has formed a joint partnership with the RCGP’s Centre for Commissioning and consultancy Ashridge Alliancce to advise CCGs ahead of authorisation.

NHS London said all 38 of the capital’s pathfinders were expected to sign up to the ‘development framework’ within weeks, and that £3.7m had been allocated for ‘leadership training’ for managers and clinicians.

The list of approved commissioning partners, which also includes Ernst and Young, Capsticks Solictors, Binder Dijker Otte, and Entrusted Health Partnership, was drawn up by NHS London after a competitive tender designed to provide CCGs with assistance in organisational development, leadership training, strategy, finance and market analysis.

The consultants will offer CCGs coaching, leadership plans, resources and how-to guides, 360 degree feedback, self-assessment tools and organisational development plans to assess their readiness for authorisation.

The move significantly boosts the private sector’s stake in advising GP commissioners, after Pulse first revealed earlier this year that dozens of CCGs had enlisted the support of McKinsey and Pricewaterhouse Coopers with QIPP, budget holding and governance.
…

GPs fear maternity pay could ‘disappear’ under NHS reforms | GPonline.com

MWF president Dr Clarissa Fabre said funding for practices to cover the cost of locums for partners on maternity leave was under threat.

It was unclear whether clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) or the NHS Commissioning Board would be responsible for the payments once PCTs were abolished, she said.

‘At present, at least you know the PCT will pay a bit of the locum payments,’ Dr Fabre said. But she warned that in future CCG budgets could be so tight that they could no longer afford to pay them.

‘Locum payments are going to disappear,’ she said.

NHS Confederation acting deputy chief executive David Stout said he could not be sure who would be responsible for the payments once PCTs no longer existed.

But he suggested that because the NHS Commissioning Board (NCB) will hold GP contracts, it could take control of maternity payments as a part of this role.

Maternity locum payments are not mandatory under current rules, with some PCTs choosing not to pay.

Mr Stout said if the payments became the responsibility of the NCB, it would have a single national policy on maternity locum payments. ‘It’s unlikely that they’d do it inconsistently,’ he said.

GPC member Dr Helena McKeown said it was still unclear who would be responsible for the payments. She said a single policy would be welcome to eliminate the current postcode lottery.

Post author:dizzy
Post published:17 October 2011
Post category:NHS politics Uncategorized
Post comments:0 Comments

NHS news review

Spread the love

Waiting times increase under the ConDem coalition government.

Celebrity Chef Jamie Oliver criticises Lansley’s “responsibility deal” with food and beverage companies to reduce obesity.

Conservative election poster 2010

A few recent news articles about the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat (Conservative) coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.

Number of NHS patients waiting more than 18 weeks has doubled, says report | Society | The Guardian

Report by King’s Fund follows release of DoH figures that showed 48% increase in breaches of legally binding NHS targets

The number of patients waiting more than the recommended maximum of 18 weeks for NHS treatment has soared by 48% since last year.

Figures released by the Department of Health came as a separate report by the King’s Fund found that in more than 45 hospital trusts, more than 10% of patients were not admitted within 18 weeks of being referred by their GPs, breaching legally binding targets in the NHS constitution. The figures have more than doubled on the previous year.

The report found that while the NHS overall had managed to meet targets on waiting times and infections despite hospitals having to find savings of between 6% and 7% this year, this masked “considerable variation” at a local level.

Using government data, the Guardian found that 28,635 patients in England who were treated in an NHS hospital during August had been waiting more than 18 weeks, compared with 19,355 in the same month in 2010 – a rise of 48%.

The King’s Fund, a leading health thinktank, concurred with this analysis, pointing out that “although average waiting times remain within target range, one in four hospitals failed to meet the target”.

Rob Findlay, who runs NHS waiting times company Gooroo, pointed out that in St Georges, Kingston, Bath, Guy’s & St Thomas’, Sheffield and South London hospital trusts, there were “1,000 patients on waiting list for more than a year”.

On this measure, the numbers waiting are the largest since the coalition came to power last year, when the health secretary, Andrew Lansley, reviewed or eased several NHS waiting time targets.

One of the measures changed was Labour’s target that no one should wait more than four hours in A&E, with the threshold lowered from 98% to 95%. The King’s Fund found that 29 hospitals failed to meet that measure. In Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust, a third of the 13,000 patients who used the hospital’s A&E ward waited more than four hours.
…

Jamie Oliver brands Andrew Lansley obesity plan as ‘patronising rubbish’ | Society | The Guardian

Health secretary sets out ‘national ambition’ to cut 5bn calories a day from Britons’ daily diet

Andrew Lansley’s announcement of a push to get the nation to cut 5bn calories a day from its diet was immediately slammed by health experts on Thursday, and branded “worthless, regurgitated, patronising rubbish” by Jamie Oliver.

Faced with a mounting obesity crisis that a succession of government initiatives on exercise have failed to turn around, the health secretary and the chief medical officer, Sally Davies, issued a “call to action” on diet, pointing out that alcohol contributed 10% to our calorie intake.

Lansley urged individuals to eat less and eat more wisely, and promised to talk to the food industry about voluntary cuts in the calorie content of processed food and drinks.

But the new plan, which Lansley termed a “national ambition” rather than a strategy, drew immediate derision from food campaigners and doctors. “Simply telling people what they already know – that they need to eat less and move more – is a complete cop-out,” said Oliver.

The TV chef and food campaigner added: “This whole strategy is just worthless, regurgitated, patronising rubbish.
…

Department of Health putting fast food companies at heart of policy on obesity, alcohol and diet-related disease

Post author:dizzy
Post published:14 October 2011
Post category:NHS politics
Post comments:0 Comments

NHS news review

Spread the love

The main NHS news story is that the House of Lords did not stop the progress of the Health and Social Care / Destroy the NHS Bill. The Lords voted on two amendments, both of which were defeated: One by Lord (David) Owen to refer the bill to a special committee and the other by Lord Rea to refuse the bill a second reading arguing that it was a huge “top-down” reorganisation which had not appeared in the Conservatives’ manifesto or the coalition agreement.

There will be many more votes by the Lords on the Health and Social Care / Destroy the NHS Bill.

40% of GPs expect to not be working for the NHS in ten years time.

Conservative election poster 2010

A few recent news articles about the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat (Conservative) coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.

“Public didn’t vote for this” says Dr John Sentamu, as NHS reforms are debated (From York Press)

THE Archbishop of York spoke against the Government’s controversial health reforms today as they were debated in the House of Lords.

Dr John Sentamu said he had received excellent treatment at three NHS teaching hospitals – St Thomas’s and University College in London, and York earlier this year for treatment to his rotator cuff around the shoulder.

He said the proposed reforms were not in the Government’s manifesto and cited the Archbishop of Canterbury’s concerns about the “remarkable speed” of radical, long-term policy changes.

The Government’s controversial bill cleared the Lords hurdle, after peers voted 330 to 262 against referring it to a special committee.
…

NHS reforms: David Cameron faces war despite House of Lords vote victory – mirror.co.uk

DAVID Cameron still faces a war over his hated NHS reforms despite the House of Lords voting yesterday not to kill off the privatisation plans.

Hopes that peers would prevent the health service being opened up to profit-making companies were dashed when scores of Lib Dems voted with the Tories.

But it is not the end of the Parliamentary process and Shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham has warned ministers that opposition is “formidable”.

He said: “The best thing would be to drop the Bill so the NHS can focus on the financial challenge and get the NHS through the dangerous period.

“Instead the Government is locking it into a period of limbo – this protracted debate.

“But let’s be clear: this fight is going on. It will be debated over weeks, even months in the House of Lords, line by line, clause by clause. And Labour will be wanting substantial and drastic changes to it.

“The Government are digging in here. They are digging in for the long haul and that is not going to help our NHS.”

Mr Burnham also pointed out that the “listening exercise” ordered by Mr Cameron in a bid to head off resistance to his proposals had failed to win over medics.
…

Battle for NHS reform in Lords is just beginning – Health News, Health & Families – The Independent

Ministers face a guerrilla war from peers over their plans for reform of the health service – despite winning two crucial votes in the House of Lords.

The Lords voted yesterday to give a second reading for the Health and Social Care Bill and threw out a separate attempt to hold it up. But Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary, will still have an uphill struggle to get the contentious measure on to the statute book.

Critics of the measures, including Liberal Democrat peers and crossbenchers, have already identified several issues on which they believe they can muster a majority against the Government. Among the potential flashpoints are moves to increase competition, the role of the watchdog Monitor, changes to the structure of the health service and changes to the Health Secretary’s constitutional position.

One Labour frontbencher said the Lords authorities should “dust off the camp-beds” in anticipation of late-night sittings during the Bill’s committee stage. A former Labour cabinet minister added: “The fight is only just starting.”

Peers rejected by 330 to 262 votes an attempt by Lord Owen, the former SDP leader, and Lord Hennessy, the constitutional expert, to refer the Bill to a special committee. The Lords also voted down a bid to kill off the legislation altogether.

By 354 to 220 votes they defeated a call from the Labour peer Lord Rea, a former GP, to refuse the Bill a second reading.

The legislation now moves to the committee stage in the Lords, where it will undergo detailed scrutiny.

NHS: not for sale | Workers’ Liberty

A bill without real mandate – Our view – Yorkshire Post

The beginning of the end for the NHS – David Miliband – Shields Gazette

Lords refuse to rescue the NHS / Britain / Home – Morning Star

Trades Union Congress – A deeply depressing day for the NHS, says TUC

GP leaders vow fight for NHS not over after Health Bill vote | GPonline.com

The fight against the NHS reforms is not over, GP leaders have vowed, after the House of Lords did not back a call for the withdrawal of the Health Bill in a key vote on Wednesday.

After a two-day debate in the House of Lords, an amendment for the Bill to be scrapped was not supported by a majority of peers.

A separate amendment calling for sections of the Bill to be submitted to a select committee for in-depth scrutiny was also not backed by peers.

GPC deputy chairman Dr Richard Vautrey said he was not surprised by the outcome of the votes, but he is still hopeful that the peers will demand substantial changes to the Health Bill during committee stage in the House of Lords.

He said the outcome of today’s vote does not impact on the BMA’s campaign for the Health Bill to be scrapped.

He said: ‘There will be no change in [the BMA’s] strategy. We have been absolutely clear about what we want.

‘This is simply the start of a long process of discussion in the House of Lords. We will continue to inform peers about what our concerns are, which will ultimately lead to substantial amendments to the Bill.’

Labour peer Baroness Thornton of Manningham also said the Bill still has a ‘long way to go in the Lords’.
…

40% of GPs expect to leave NHS by 2021 – newsarticle-content – Pulse

Four out of 10 GPs do not expect to be working to an NHS contract in 10 years’ time strengthening fears of a ‘recruitment and retention crisis’.

The Healthcare Index published by Lloyds TSB Commercial, which talked to 208 GPs as well as dentists and pharmacists, found confidence in the future of the healthcare sector is very low with only 59% of GPs expect to still be working to an NHS contract in ten years time.

A spokeswoman for the researchers said that overall confidence in the future of the GP sector reflects widespread concern around finances and growing competition with 94% of GPs are expecting further financial pressures over the next five years and 92% anticipate increased competition in the market place over the same period.

Consolidation is expected in the GP profession, with 82% expecting a rise in the number of larger practices, potentially as a response to the formation of commissioning groups.

GPC deputy chair and Leeds GP Dr Richard Vautrey told Pulse: ‘These figures suggest a series level of anxiety within the profession about the future of NHS general practice which is being created by the Government in England’s Health and Social Care Bill.’

‘This anxiety is also reflected in the drop in the number of young doctors who are considering general practice as a career and the increased number of older GPs who are looking to retire early.’

‘There is a real risk that we are going to return to the recruitment and retention crisis that we saw prior to the introduction of the new GMS contract.’

Medics attack reform of NHS | This is Cornwall

Dozens of senior South West medical professionals have united in their condemnation of planned healthcare reforms over concerns quality will be compromised for profit.

The Government’s controversial Health and Social Care Bill is roundly rejected by 37 health experts in a letter to the Western Morning News today – despite the shake-up last night edging closer to becoming passed into law.

The letter, whose signatories include public health doctors, dentists and researchers from across the region, claims the proposed legislation “threatens to liberate the Government from its responsibility for securing the provision of a comprehensive health service”. It says the Bill, should it become an Act, would pave the way for private businesses to compete with NHS service and not-for-profit companies for multi-million-pound contracts to run hospitals. “This means profit before patient care”, the experts suggest.

Today’s outright refusal by the senior medical professionals to accept the reforms – which the Department for Health says will give patients more choice, root out waste and offer NHS staff more power to improve care – adds to the growing number of critics, robustly defiant of these changes.

It also serves to underline the ridicule – particularly during a recent Prime Minister’s Questions – which has followed David Cameron’s claim that “the whole health profession is on board” for the reforms. In an interview with the WMN in August, the Prime Minister attempted to pour cold water on the flames of discontent, even within the Coalition, concerning the reforms.
…

Please be assured that this blog is a non-commercial blog (weblog) which does not feature advertising and has not ever produced any income.

dizzy

Post author:dizzy
Post published:13 October 2011
Post category:NHS politics
Post comments:0 Comments

You’d better run, You’d better take cover

Spread the love

I want it recorded in no uncertain terms that I totally oppose the Health and Social Care Bill.

I was hoping to make a threat but then I’m now just quoting lyrics of a song off the radio.

Recent opposition groups are going for a 99% / 1% analysis. It’s useful although it’s only a start. Being a capable analyst, I have a far much better analysis .e.g. I am able to catch the nuances of 7/7 commentary (I know).

Anyaway, please be assured that I am totally opposed the ‘Health and Social Care Bill’ / Destroy the NHS Bill.

Post author:dizzy
Post published:12 October 2011
Post category:Uncategorized
Post comments:0 Comments