NHS Mixed Sex wards fined over £600K in April

May 22nd, 2011

Following previous posts about mixed wards in NHS hospitals, it has been announced that 2, 660 mixed sex wards in England have resulted in fines.

Hospitals should have abolised mixed sex wards as part of the previous Labour government’s policy.  However, many hospitals have found this very hard to achieve.  This may be due to budgetary constraints or physical layout of hospitals and wards.  Extra funds have been given to hospital trusts to help build more single rooms to help alleviate this issue.

The number of mixed sex wards has been falling and since the 11,000 cases in December this has fallen rapidly to 5500 in March and now to 2,660 in April.  Although this is going in the right direction, there is still a long way to go.  It is worth noting, however, that over 1 million patients are treated each month and this number is relatively small in relation to the total number of patients undergoing treatment.

Mixed sex wards are defined as hospital accommodation where patients share sleeping, bathroom and toilet facilities with those of the opposite sex.  It is possible for hospitals to have wards separated into ‘bays’ to segregate male and female patients, as long as the bathroom and toilet facilities are separate, too.  Intensive care units and Accident & Emergency wards are not held to this rule.

Fining hospitals for having patients in mixed wards commenced in April.  Hospitals are now fined £250 per day for each patient that is kept in a mixed sex ward.  This has resulted in at least £665,000 of fines in April, although this amount could actually be higher.

The fines will be reinvested back into ‘patient care’ says Andrew Lansley.

NHS Reform Plans still on track

May 9th, 2011

Government plans to change the NHS are still on track after a commons challenge to the shake up was defeated.

Labour called for the NHS proposals to be abandoned but were defeated when MP’s rejected it and voted to continue with the changes, although with a reduced majority.  There has been much controversy over the proposed NHS changes as reported by Freedom Healthnet  over the past few months and this shows no signs of abating.

The NHS reforms have come under fire from various bodies including the Royal College of GP’s who said that the changes risked ‘unravelling and dismantling the NHS’.  The government, however, believe that the reforms will give GP’s more control over budgets and allow the private sector to help address patient care.

The parliamentary debate, which saw a smaller majority for the government, was held after the government agreed to stop the progress of the Health & Social Care Bill.  The bill was paused in order for the government to listen to the various organisations and bodies and then see how plans could be improved.

Shadow Health Secretary John Healey asked the government to shelve the ‘high risk, damaging and unjustified’ reforms to the NHS that would drive hospitals ‘to the brink’.

A decision on how to proceed is anticipated in mid June.

Hospital Waiting Times Longest for 3 Years

April 19th, 2011

NHS Hospital waiting times are their longest for 3 years says independent think tank, The King’s Fund.  It reports that 15% of patients waited over 18 weeks for treatment.  This is the longest waiting time since April 2008.

The Kings Fund indicated that this increase in waiting times was due to the financial pressures on the NHS.  The NHS Trusts have been using private facilities in private hospitals and treatment centres to help manage their waiting lists.  However, many Trusts have been putting restrictions on this.  Freedom Healthnet recently reported on the NHS being against private healthcare and limiting treatment due, often, to financial considerations.  This could be one of the reasons for the waiting times increasing.

The government, however, dispute these figures as they say that they include figures for patients who have selected to delay their own treatment.  They estimate that the percentage of people waiting longer than 18 weeks is 10.2%.

Waiting times start from the time that a GP writes a referral to another body / provider until treatment commences.  The 18 week time limit is that placed in the NHS constitution.

Professor John Appleby

The King’s Fund’s Professor John Appleby noted that performance targets and money were the two items that kept waiting times under 18 weeks.  The government no longer monitors performance targets – indeed managers used to be sacked for failing to maintain targets – and there is less money in the NHS.  These are the two key factors.

The issue of hospital waiting times is one of the major reasons for people turning to private health insurance, as reported in our Freedom Healthnet News section.   Other connected stories include the concern over frontline services reported recently, such as the loss of 890 London Ambulance Service jobs and also the proposed cuts which will mean 40,000 nursing job losses over the next 3 years.

Health Minister Contradicts RCN Nurse Job Loss Figures

April 13th, 2011

On the day of reports that Nurses pass a motion of no confidence in Health Secretary Andrew Lansley, BBC’s breakfast team speak to  Health Minister Simon Burns about nursing cuts:

BBC: The Royal College of Nursing are saying that 20.000 nursing jobs, 40,000 clinical jobs could go as a result of your reforms. Are they right?

BBC Interview Health Minister Burns

BBC Breakfast Interviews Health Minister Burns (img cr: BBC)

“No I don’t think they are because their survey flies in the face of the evidence based upon the workforce statistics.  We have seen for the 15 months up to the end of December last year that actually the number of nurses in the NHS has increased by 2677 and even in the last quarter of last year, the number of nurses increased by just over 1200.  We have also seen about 3000 extra doctors within the NHS.  But what is important and what the government and the department of health have made quite plain to the NHS is that priority has got to be given to protecting and supporting frontline services.  We are honouring our pledge for real term increases in funding.  There is this £20 billion efficiency savings where every single penny has got to be reinvested in frontline services so that patients are at the heart of care.”

Health Minister Simon Burns

Health Minister Simon Burns (img cr: BBC)

BBC: People understand the notion that cuts are having to be made.  But right at the beginning of that answer, you said, “I don’t think they are right”.  In a way, that goes to the heart of that debate, isn’t it.  THey have done their figures, you say you have donte your figures.  They have consulted with NHS Trusts and they have come back with this figure.  You think you have got a different figure.  But that is the problem, isn’t it?  Isn’t that why, now, you ultimately have caution about your own plans because you just don’t know and if they are correct and if these numbers are true and that is how it breaks down in reality, there is no way those frontline services you keep talking about can remain intact.

“No, because there is a significant difference between the two figures.  The Royal College of Nursing’s figures are based upon a survey.  The figures that I have given you are based upon fact because they are the actual workforce statistics within the National Health Service.  And that is a very big difference. ”

Find out more about NHS reforms and cuts.

‘iphone’ App Implant Relieves Back Pain

April 1st, 2011

The BBC’s Fergus Walsh has reported on the motion sensor ‘iphone’ app implant that relieves chronic back pain.

The implant has been developed similar to the motion sensors of the Nintendo or Iphone and could signal an end to sever back pain suffered by many across the UK.

back pain implant

Back Pain Implant. Img credit BBC

Doctors at Guys Hospital in London insert two wires into the spinal chord.  They are linked ot a neuro-stimulator which sends out electrical impulses to help mask the body’s pain signals.

For the patient, Robert Mason, it is a revelation.  “That is absolutely brilliant.  Really good”

The neuro-stimulator uses the same motion-sensor technology found in devices like the nintendo WII and the iphone.

By the simple use of gravity the sensor can work out whether the patient is upright; lying on their back or on their front or on their side.  Crucially, every time they move it adjusts the amount of stimulation to suit their position.

Robert Mason has endured constant severe back and leg pain for 8 years after an accident.  Two weeks after surgery, his device is about to become fully functional with his device being switched on.  The neuro stimulator is not erradicating Robert’s pain but will mask it enough to enable him to go back to work and to sleep.

“That would be a blessing,” says Robert.  “Four hours straight (sleep) would be perfect.  I haven’t had it for 8 years, so that would be lovely.”

The device costs £13,000 and only a minority of patients with chronic pain will be eligible for it.

Ryan O'Leary Medtronic

Ryan O'Leary Medtronic Img Credit BBC

“This is just getting rid of pain that does a person no good” says manufacturer Medtronic’s Ryan O’Leary.  “The pain is not telling your body anything useful other than… its just debilitating, you cannot do anything.  It (the device) is just detecting the force of gravity and Robert’s postion with respect to it.”

Robert Mason can now walk his children home from school without being in constant pain.  He says he feels like a proper parent again and is even planning a family holiday.

Find out more about treatments, NICE and the NHS or about private medical treatment via insurance.

Blood Flow Monitor Could Save NHS £400m

March 31st, 2011

A British invention, the Blood Flow Monitor, has been highlighted as reducing complications and speeding up recovery.  NICE – the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence – has indicated that if 50% of eligible patients were monitored using the device then it would save the NHS more than £400 million a year.  Currently it is only used in 3% of eligible patients.

The BBC’s Fergus Walsh interviewed Professor Monty Mythen, an anaesthetist from University College London, about the device.  The following is a transcript of the interview:

So Professor, can you explain how this works, very simply?

Here we have a pipe which has been specially modified.  We pass this into the patient.  This (one end) is the monitoring end.  We pass it in through the mouth and then feed it gently down into the gullet.  Our aim is for it to sit within the gullet, directly adjacent to the aorta, which is the main pipe which flows out from the heart.

And what does it pick up when its there?

It uses ultrasound to measure the speed of blood flowing out from the heart.

and you have got this actually operating here?

We have got it operating here at the moment. So what we have here is the trace. On one axis we have speed, across the bottom we have time. So the area under that curve is distance.

Blood Flow Monitor

Blood Flow Monitor, Image credit: BBC

Very simply, how does that help you and the patient during the operation?

Well by being able to look directly at each beat of the heart and the amount of blood that is flowing out from it, we can adjust the amount of – particularly – fluid we give to the patient to make that the optimal size.

And does that then lead to less complications?

That results in improved delivery of oxygen and nutrients to the tissues and that avoids complications in the long run.

And does that actually save lives?

There is evidence to suggest that this also saves lives.

Surgery

I can see there is a huge bank of monitors here already, why do you need something extra?

We need something because most of these monitors do not measure directly the flow from the heart.  So, the flow carries the oxygen and nutrients to the cell.  That is the main thing that we are interested in.  Traditionally what we have done is measure pressure as a way to try to gauge that.

Blood Pressure

Blood Pressure. img credit BBC

And any side effects for patients?

There are no risks associated with the use of this (blood flow monitor) that have been identified in the fifteen years that we have used it.  Occasionally, a minor sore throat, but nothing compare to the invasive monitors that we have used in the past.

Breast Cancer Advances Could Impact within 12 Months

March 28th, 2011

Harvard has released details of its study into triple-negative breast cancer and potential advances which may impact treatement of the disease in as little as 12 months.

The study identified how a particular enzyme (PTPN12) fails to function in 60% of triple negative breast cancers. The absence of these enzymes can cause normal breast cells to become cancerous.  The team identified 3 enzymes that were activated when the enzyme PTPN12 was ’switched off’.  The study suggests that these three enzymes, when activated improperly by the lack of the PTPN12, could be a major cause of triple negative breast cancer.  The trials in mice looked at how they could ‘turn off’ these three enzymes.

The Harvard team used two currently available cancer drugs to treat mice with triple negative breast cancer.  These drugs targeted the three enzymes.  By using one drug which worked on two of the three enzymes (Tykerb) tumours shrank by 80%.  When combined with another cancer drug (Sutent), which targets the third enzyme, the tumorus shrank by more than 90% and the life expectancy ‘more than doubled’.

Breast cancer cell image (photo credit: guardian.co.uk)

The results suggest that the two drugs used in tandem could provide a therapy for those with triple-negative breast cancer.  In the UK, both of these drugs have NICE guidance for certain conditions under certain circumstances.

The Harvard team will now launch a phase 2 trial by the beginning of 2012.

What is triple negative breast cancer?

Triple negative breast cancer is an aggressive disease with few options for treatment.  Chemotherapy is currently the method of treating the tumours and if it spreads there is an average survival rate of 1 year.  It is when the breast cancer cells test negative for oestrogen, progesterone and HER2 receptors.  This means that the cancer’s growth is not likely to be ‘fuelled by oestrogen or progesterone or by growth signals from the HER2 protein’ and does not respond to hormonal therapies or those that target the HER2 receptors.  The latter would include the much written-about drug Herceptin.  However, other drugs and drug combinations can be used to treat triple negative breast cancer.

According to Cancer Research UK, 15% of breast cancers are triple negative.

Read Freedom Healthnet’s news pages for more information and news about medical insurance, health matters and the NHS.

David Cameron accused of Wrecking NHS

March 17th, 2011

Labour leader Ed Miliband has accused Prime Minister David Cameron of ‘wrecking’ Labours record on the NHS during prime minister’s questions :

Ed Miliband: “I am proud of our record on the NHS, 100 new hospitals, more doctors and nurses than ever before, the shortest waiting times in history, the highest level of patient satisfaction ever… but he is wrecking our record on the NHS.  And what is his answer Mr Speaker? It is a bill htat creates a free market free-for-all and threatens NHS services. Now, a very specific question… will he confirm that this bill makes healthcare subject to EU competition law for the first time in history?”

David Cameron: “I have to say, it he is beginning to sound like the last leader of the labour party.  If he won’t listen to the advisor to the last labour government, maybe he will listen to his own health spokesman, who said this,

‘Noone in the house of commons knows more about … (called to order)

“If I can take the trouble to read out the opposition health spokesman’s speeches, they should at least have the decency to listento them.  He said this:

‘Noone in the house of commons knows more about the NHS than Andrew Lansley, except perhaps Steven Dorrell.  But Andrew Lansley spent 6 years in oppostion as shadow health secretary.  Noone has visited more of the NHS; noone has talked to more people in the NHS’ and he went on to say,’… these plans are consistent, coherent and comprehensive.  I would expect nothing less from Andrew Lansley. ”

Ed Miliband: “…talk about pre-scripted answers again… why doesnt he answer the question?  Does he even know whether the health service will now be subject to EU competition law? Look at this bill, Mr Speaker,

  • chapter 2: Competition.  That is chapter 2.
  • Clause 60:  Functions under the Competition Act.
  • Clause 66: Reviews by the Competition Commission.
  • Clause 68:  Co-operation with the office of Fair Trading.

Mr Speaker, can the prime minister explain to the British people, what has that got to do with healthcare?”

DC:  “The party is the party that obviously rigged the system.  So there was cherry-picking by the NHS.  The point I make is this, the Members opposite all stood on a manifesto at the last election that said this… Patience requiring elective care will have the right in law to choose from any provider who meets NHS standards and NHS quality.  They were in favour of competition in their manifesto.  All that is changed is that they are jumping on every band wagon, supporting every union, blocking every reform, and opposing the extra money into the NHS”

EM: “He just doesn’t get it.  He is threatening the fabric of the NHS.  This bill shows everything that people don’t like about this government.  Broken promises.  Arrogance, Incompetence, and ignoring people who know something about the NHS service.  Doesn’t it show once again -as the BMA said yesterday – as the Liberal Democrats said on Saturday, ‘you can’t trust the Tories on the NHS. ”

DC: “He should remember the fact that the BMA opposed foundation hosptials, GP funding, opposed longer opening hours for GP’s surgeries.  Isn’t it typical that, just as he has to back every other trade union, just as he has no ideas of his own, that he comes here and reads a BMA press release.  How utterly feeble”.

NHS Reforms Very Dangerous says BMA Chief

March 16th, 2011

Head of the British Medical Association, Dr Hamish Meldrum, states that the NHS reform is ‘very dangerous’ in his interview with the BBC.  Prior to the SRM Live debate yesterday in which the particpants fell short of declaring a vote of no confidence in the Health Secretary Andrew Lansley, the BBC’s Branwen Jeffrerys interviews the leader of the BMA.

Transcript of the BBC interview with Dr Hamish Meldrum:

The government says that the BMA supports its plans, what is your response to that?

“Well I don’t know where the government have got the idea that we support their proposals.  We didn’t see an awful lot of the detail until the actual bill came out. But now that we’ve seen the detail, now that we have seen that, really up until now, up until very recently the government hasn’t shown any willingness to listen to the chorus…. not just the BMA but the chorus of disapproval about many of its policies, now that we have hardened our position…”

You’ve got a special representative meeting, the first for almost 20 years.  Isn’t that partly because of the strong grass roots feeling that the BMA hasn’t been shouting loud enough about these concerns?

“This was a decision taken by the BMA council, by the leadership, because we thought the time was right.  We are always listening and this is another way of ratcheting up our concerns about the government’s proposals. So, yes, we do want to hear from them.  We want to hear what they think.  We want to put more pressure on the government to change what we think are flawed and very risky proposals for the NHS.  I am a realist and the likliehood of completely getting rid of the health bill is very remote.  But I still think it is not too late to change.  We would rather get back to a stage where the NHS was the preferred provider.  But there is also the pace of change, the enormity of the change and lets remember that this is all happening at a time when the health service is facing the most difficult financial problems that it has faced for many years.  So this is (a) high risk strategy that the government is undertaking.  They keep saying they want to listen to doctors, listen to health professionals.  Well, please listen to us, please listen to the nurses, listen to the other people involved in the health service and actually don’t go ahead with alot of this very risky and what we would say, very dangerous proposals for the NHS.”

Find out more about the latest news concerning the NHS.

More Private Healthcare Providers to Treat NHS Patients

March 15th, 2011

The BBC’s Branwen Jeffrerys interviews Mr David Bennett, head of the economic regulator Monitor, about his expectation to see greater use of private healthcare and charities and the possibility that unpopular NHS services may be allowed to close.

Transcript of the BBC  interview with Mr David Bennett:

Dr David Bennnett interview with BBC

“For patients, one of the fundamental things is the way they get their care.  So, for example, today a lot of care is provided in hospitals.  For a long while, people have been saying there is a need to move care out of hospitals and closer to home – even in the home.  And so I hope one of the things people will see is that more of their care is being provided in their communities or in their homes.  From a tax payer’s point of view, this is about making sure that we get the maximum possible value for money … for the very large amount of money that we spend on healthcare in this country. ”

You are being asked to level the playing field between private companies that want to have a greater opportunity to treat NHS patients and NHS hospitals.  What are you going to be able to do, to do that?

“It is quite right, the private sector provider has raised a number of issues like the pensions the NHS employees get, which they see as disadvantaging them… which it does.  But at the same time, there are disadvantages for the public sector, they have to provide training for people who work in the NHS; they have to treat all patients, no matter how complex their case is.  So, the first thing we have to do is to really understand wheree the balance lies.  And I think at the moment, noone quite knows which side is advantaged or disadvantaged.  Once we have done that, then we will have various options available to us to try to level the playing field, and that is something that, no doubt, will be happening over many years.”

Are you saying very clearly that there will be no competition on price for looking after NHS patients?

“There is definitely legitimate concern that if suppliers compete on price that the risk is that quality deteriorates.  Absolutely, that is not something that we want to happen.  So it has to be applied very carefully.  I wouldn’t go so far as to say that you can never have competition.  I think over time it probably will emerge and it… will emerge in some areas, not in others.  Initially, I think it will be very limited and the emergence will be slow.”

The government has been very clear in that it doesn’t want tax-payers money to be used to prop up NHS hospitals that can’t make their ends meet financially.  What would happen to an NHS hospital in that situation?

“If an NHS hospital is providing a service that people don’t want to use, which the commissioners, the GP’s that buy services on behalf of patients don’t want to send their patients to, then indeed those services may find that their finances get into difficulty and they may ultimately need to close.  But that is only where there are alternative services available.  If there is an alternative, that is when the service will be designated as essential.  It means that even if the provider gets into difficulty, we will make sure that the service is still provided.”

That opportunity for people to come in and provide healthcare and also for other services or part of services to close if they are … not successful.. that is going to be one of the real tests of this…

“It is really, and I think it is one of the things that we want to see changed, that if we see new providers emerging, new types of services emerging and, frankly, older types of services that people don’t want to use disappearing, that is a sign of success because it should represent improvement for the better for patients.”

Read about the latest NHS reforms and news, including transcript of the interview with health secretary Andrew Lansley.