The care sector has always been starved of the monies it needs to perform the service that the public expects and that the politicians claim they are delivering. Careworld aims to highlight the inadequacies, the poor decision making, the hypocrisy and their consequences.

 

 

 

NICE backs down over use of Lucentis

Categories: Medication/Treatment, NICE

27th August 2008


The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) have finally backed down over the use of the drug Lucentis for the treatment of wet age-related macular degeneration which is the leading cause of blindness.

As we have reported before (see Cost accountants – your NHS need you - 30th April 2007) NICE had previously ruled that the drug could only be offered to those already blind in one eye.

Blindness occurs when blood vessels grow in the eye behind the retina, leaking fluid and blood which causes scarring. Lucentis targets vascular endothelial growth factor, a protein involved in the formation of blood vessels. Those who have the condition can lose their sight in fewer than three months if it is not treated promptly.

In November 2007 NICE agreed that 14 injections of the drug could be made in each eye. This new arrangement permits the drug company to fund treatment after that.

It has taken two and half years to reach this stage and of course many more people have gone blind in this time because they were unlucky enough to live in the 40% of Trusts that have insisted on waiting for the final NICE ruling. In Scotland the drug has been freely available to doctors.

Hopefully this will lead the way for other new drugs for which top-up doses may be required to be funded in the same way in future, for example with the kidney cancer drug Sutent, which costs £24,000 a year, and extends the life of suffers.

NICE have once again been found wanting. Delaying the introduction of drugs which have been approved, and used, across the rest of Europe as well as other parts of the United Kingdom shows us that there are serious issues that need to addressed with its methods and indeed even its continued existence

Public misled over level of cancelled operations

21st August 2008

Information released under the Freedom of Information Act calls into question government figures on the number of cancelled operations. The true level is twice that reported by the government! The figures show that more than 100,000 operations have been cancelled by the NHS over the past year because of bed shortages, staffing problems and other non-clinical reasons. More than seven thousand patients suffered multiple cancelations. One patient had an operation cancelled by Plymouth Hospitals nine times. A patient at Kingston was let down eight times and one at York had surgery postponed six times.

The most common reported reason for cancellation was problems with theatre bookings, responsible for 16,617 cases. Other causes included 400 operations cancelled because the patient's notes had been lost, more than 10,000 cancelled because of bed shortages, nearly 4,000 because of equipment failure and more than 11,000 because of staffing shortages.

Last year, the Department of Health announced that just over 57,000 operations had been cancelled. However, these figures only cover cancellations made in the 24 hours before an operation is due to take place. When hospitals were asked to reveal all cancelled operations, the figures were almost twice as high prompting allegations from the Conservatives that ministers were "spinning the statistics". Shortly before the last election, Tony Blair, the former Prime Minister, said that it was "unacceptable" for operations to be cancelled.

The trusts with the highest reported cases of cancelled surgery apologised yesterday for providing inaccurate data.

A spokesman for the Department of Health defended the Government saying that patients were more concerned with those cancelled within 24 hours before an operation and so it was reasonable not to report cancelations before that.

This excuse is frankly a disgrace. The government have been caught out “spinning” the statistics. This attempt to mislead the public is shameful and we would expect the Health Secretary to apologise and promise to review the basis of all statistics supplied by his service.

NHS accused of ageism

15th August 2008

A study from the University of East Anglia and published in the British Medical Journal shows that hospitals are practicing age discrimination by failing to provide basic standards of care to many patients aged 50 and over.

Shortfalls were found in the quality of care offered to patients with conditions such as osteoarthritis, incontinence and osteoporosis and doctors paid particular attention to assessments that earned them extra money, including heart disease, diabetes and high blood pressure. Only two-thirds of the care recommended for older people was actually received by them, with the lowest level of 29 per cent given to arthritis victims. However, heart patients got more than four-fifths of the care they should have.

Gordon Lishman, director-general of Age Concern, said: 'It is absolutely disgraceful that over a third of the health care older people need is never actually received. 'These figures show age discrimination within the NHS is still rife. The system is failing thousands of older people. 'As the main adult users of the health service, older people should be at the centre of decisions around service provision, but the current NHS was not designed with older people's needs in mind.'

This report highlights the problem of government targets. Incentivizing doctors to focus upon certain conditions will inevitably result in other conditions being neglected. It would be better to allow doctors to rely upon their clinical judgements in every treatment rather than simplistic targeting to meet politicians promises.

Dental costs rising at twice the rate of inflation

Categories: Dentistry

14th August 2008

NHS patients have seen the cost of dental treatment soar by twice the rate of inflation following disastrous reforms.

The conservative Shadow Health Minister, Mike Penning, said yesterday "Labour's dental legacy is one of shameful failure. "Not only are people now paying more when they see their NHS dentist, but Labour's botched policies mean that millions of hard-working families have completely lost access to affordable dental care. "Labour ministers need to own up to their mistakes, stop dithering and take action now to rectify the mess they've got the country into."

The big increase in charges happened as a result of the new dental contract. To illustrate this in 2007/8, a check-up in England cost a patient £15.90. However in Northern Ireland, which has kept the old system, patients paid only £6.16.

Ann Keen, a government health minister, responded saying "Patient charges have stayed the same in real terms, as they have gone up in line with inflation." If true this would of course call into doubt Bank of England statistics on the rate of inflation. For example between March 2005 and March 2006, patients paid £444.1M towards their dental care. But after the new charges were introduced in April 2006, it rose to £475.4M. This was an increase of 7% in 12 months. Between 2005 and 2006 the Bank of England’s rate of inflation was 3.1%.

Last month a Healthcare Commission survey showed many are forced to pay for private dental care because they cannot get an NHS appointment. A poll of 69,000 patients in England revealed only 50% visit the dentist regularly. A quarter visit a private dentist, with the rest not going at all. However 79% of those who do not see an NHS dentist said they would like to.

Labour polices are clearly not working!

Primary Care Trusts accused of bullying, ignoring and patronising cancer patients

11th August, 2008

A shocking report from the charity Rarer Cancers Forum (RCF) has uncovered a chaotic system of deciding who should get life saving cancer drugs. Where drugs are not approved by NICE a patient can lodge an "exceptional request" directly to the primary care trust, and put forward their particular medical or personal circumstances which should then lead to a decision to fund. However Experts asked to advise the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence have lodged complaints, describing the consultation as a sham.

Data gathered from 62 NHS trusts shows that 2,065 patients appealed recently to health service managers to receive high-cost cancer treatments that are not yet approved or have been rejected by the NHS value-for-money watchdog. These drugs are widely available throughout Western Europe but patients in England are effectively being left to die if they could not persuade their local trusts to fund treatment. One in four appeals made in a 20-month period was rejected. But in a post code lottery one primary care trust had no successful appeals, compared to 96% in a nearby trust.

Those who are refused must settle for a less effective treatment or pay privately for the drugs – at the risk of having all their other NHS care withdrawn.

These life-and-death judgments are made behind closed doors by secretive ‘priorities panels’ dominated by NHS managers. These panels are accused of bullying, ignoring and patronising patients.

A spokesman for the Department of Health said "The draft NHS Constitution will address this by making it explicit that patients have the right to NICE-approved drugs if clinically appropriate. "We will also speed up the national process for appraising new drugs and make more transparent and consistent the process for local funding of drugs not appraised by NICE or where NICE has yet to issue guidance."

This of course does not actually deal with this procedure! It is surely a scandal that we can fund multiple wars across the world yet cannot fund cancer drugs for our citizens that are routinely prescribed across Europe. Providing an appeals procedure that cancer sufferers can use to gain access to the drugs is clearly good but when these panels are accused of bullying, ignoring and patronising patients, and, not applying consistent criteria across the country, then the public should expect Alan Johnson, the health secretary, to act quickly!

Pest infestations rife in our hospitals

6th August, 2008

The Tories have used the Freedom of Information Act to uncover the truth about the state of hygiene in NHS hospitals. They report cases of rats in maternity wards, wasps and fleas in neo-natal units, bed bug infestations, flies in operating theatres and maggots found in patients' slippers, hospitals overrun with maggots ants and mice, cockroaches in a urology unit and a store for sterile materials infested with mice.

66% of Trusts reported problems with rats, 77% with mice, 59% with cockroaches, 59% with biting insects and fleas, 24% with bed bugs and 6% with maggots. In all 70% of Trusts had to call in pest controllers at least 50 times over the last two years. The worst hospital had more than a thousand incidents with another five with over 800 each. One in five Trusts reported infestations in sterile areas.

Surprisingly the healthcare watchdog which inspects hospital trusts against a strict hygiene code said yesterday that there have been little concerns reported to them.

The Health Minister Ivan Lewis tried today to defuse the issue saying that the use of pest control is a sign of good proactive management. Controversially he went on to say that “The claim that insects spread hospital acquired infections is entirely unproven. There is no evidence of their carriage of antibiotic resistant bacteria being a hazard to patients”. This runs contrary to most expert opinion!

Cutbacks in planned maintenance in Trusts has produced a large backlog of work. This is a direct consequence of government targets imposed onto Trusts to reduce costs yet the minister refused to answer questions about this

Shadow health secretary Andrew Lansley said: "Labour have said over and over again that they will improve cleanliness in our hospitals but these figures clearly show that they are failing. It is difficult for health service estates to maintain a completely pest free environment but the level and variety of these infestations is concerning. "We need greater transparency in NHS infection control, and publishing data like this is one way in which we can drive up overall hygiene standards."

This report is valuable in bringing the state of hygiene in the NHS Trusts to the public attention. Hopefully action will now be taken, by health ministers, Trust managers, the healthcare watchdog and by patient groups. We believe that such statistics should now be published annually.

No one to be prosecuted over scandalous lapses in hygiene at Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells hospitals

31st July 2008

The Healthcare Commission report described a litany of errors in infection control that caused an avoidable tragedy. 90 patients died as a direct result of serious lapses in hygiene which Health Secretary Alan Johnson called scandalous. In addition to these deaths the Commission identified a further 179 patients whose deaths were at least partly caused by the errors in infection control.

The report into the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust found that poor staffing, dirty wards and too much focus on financial management all contributed to two serious outbreaks of C diff in 2005 and early 2006.

In spite of this the police have decided that nobody will be charged! Following their review of the Commission’s report they have concluded that because in their opinion there is no chance of a successful prosecution they will not conduct a criminal investigation into the Trust. In a statement, Kent Police said “Having reviewed the report and interviewed the author and the experts engaged by the Healthcare Commission, Kent Police has concluded that there is no information to indicate that any grossly negligent act has occurred.”

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) have also decided that there is insufficient information to prove that offences under health and safety legislation occurred and so are also dropping the case. Sandra Caldwell, its deputy chief executive, said “HSE shares the police’s conclusion that, from the information available, we cannot establish with certainty a causal link between failings to manage infection and the death of any particular person”.

Anna Walker, chief executive of the Healthcare Commission, said the trust was so focused on meeting Government targets and dealing with high levels of debt that it failed to deal properly with the infection risk. Nurses at the trust were too rushed to wash hands and left patients to lie in their own excrement. Alcohol wipes, which do not kill C diff, were used to clean toilets rather than soap and water, which does. Bedpans that had been washed still contained visible traces of faeces. Beds were much too close together and patients with infection were being treated on open wards instead of in isolation.

Geoff Martin of campaign group Health Emergency said the outbreak was possibly the worst single, corporate failure in the history of the NHS. He said: "The decision not to bring charges over the catastrophic management failures at Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells sends out a signal that no matter how many people die, those at the top can bail out without taking the rap”.

The Chief Executive of the NHS, David Nicholson, said that the Trust’s failures were wholly unacceptable.

That the police concluded that it did not have a duty to prosecute and so has failed to carry out a proper criminal investigation is surprising. They state that they considered charges of corporate manslaughter or gross negligent manslaughter committed by an individual, but their investigation concluded there was no information in the commission's report to suggest any death referred to amounted to manslaughter.

We believe that the public interest has not been well served. Public confidence in the police force will not be improved by their failure to fully investigate these deaths, however, at least those in authority in health trusts around the country can sleep easier in their beds tonight in spite of deaths from C diff rising by over 70% last year.

Death by Indifference

30th July 2008

The deaths of six patients with learning disabilities who suffered appalling neglect at the hands of the NHS were "not isolated incidents", a report, Death by Indifference, has concluded. The independent enquiry was launched after Mencap highlighted the cases last year.

Amongst the six were Martin Ryan, 43, who went without food for 26 days after suffering a stroke and Emma Kemp, 26, who was given a fifty-fifty chance of survival after being diagnosed with cancer but was denied treatment as doctors thought she would be uncooperative.

The inquiry, chaired by Sir Jonathan Michael, found that existing guidelines and laws, such as the Disability Discrimination Act, aimed at making sure that people with learning disabilities got equal treatment were not being followed. He said: "We do not need a new framework, the legislation is already in place”. He has asked that hospital trusts should have to show they had taken the needs of people with learning disabilities into account when planning services, making "reasonable adjustments" where required.He calls for annual health checks for the 1.5 million people with learning disabilities in the UK, in order to pick up early signs of illness that they may be unable to communicate. Tougher inspection, better training and improved management are needed to ensure people with learning disabilities get equal treatment

Mencap said yesterday that it had since received 20 further reports of patients who have died as a result of neglect in NHS institutions, and 15 serious incidents.

The Health Secretary, Alan Johnson, has promised a response to the report will be published soon. We would expect that action is already being taken to implement the recommendations of the enquiry. There is no excuse for yet more dithering!

 

August 2008
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
 << <   > >>
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Let us have your views (or if you have a story that you think deserves an airing) by sending us an email here



Search