Showing posts with label Jeremy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jeremy. Show all posts

Saturday, February 9, 2013

Jeremy Laurance: Locals won’t like this – but it could be a healthy sign

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Ed Miliband complains the decision is made on cost, not clinical, grounds.  This is, ultimately, a false distinction. Spending £153 million to prop up a failing trust in south London means denying that sum to patients in the rest of London. Moreover, if the trust is bailed out there is no incentive for other trusts to stay within budget.

Why are some trusts failing? In large part because services are in the wrong place to provide the best care to meet local needs. That is especially true of A&E.  We have known for years that it is safer, with better outcomes for patients, when medical expertise is concentrated in fewer, larger units even though that means longer travelling time for patients.

Despite this, politicians persist in playing one tune in public and another in private when it comes to hospital closures – joining the public protest march whilst agreeing with health officials about the need for reconfiguration in private. William Hague, Chris Grayling and Iain Duncan Smith are among coalition government ministers who have intervened to oppose threats to local A&E and other services in their constituencies.

Sir Bruce Keogh, NHS medical director, is examining a plan to rank A&E units as first or second tier, which would mean more local units linked in a network to facilitate swift transfers to the centres of expertise. Lewisham could be the harbinger of such a plan. It won’t please the locals and a big question remains over costs – but it could point to a better future for emergency care.


View the original article here

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Embattled Lewisham A&E gets a stay of execution as Jeremy Hunt shies away from closure

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

The health secretary wrong footed critics when he announced the partial downgrading of the A&E unit at Lewisham hospital, south London, to help rescue a neighbouring trust from bankruptcy. He had been expected either to save the unit or close it.

Lewisham would become a second rank A&E department, treating up to three quarters of the cases currently seen, with more serious cases sent to first rank A&E departments at Kings College, St Thomas’s, Queen Elizabeth, Woolwich and Princess Royal, Bromley, Mr Hunt said.

The decision followed advice from NHS medical director Sir Bruce Keogh, who is heading a review into A&E units nationally which is considering a health department proposal for a two tier emergency service. Details of the plan for Lewisham and neighbouring trusts have yet to be spelt out but appear to represent the first moves to implement a two tier arrangement.

The announcement, which included the downgrading of the maternity department at the hospital to be midwife-led, provoked anger from unions and opposition MPs who accused Mr Hunt of putting cost savings before clinical care. Ed Miliband said it was driven by the “wrong priorities.”

“We think it’s the wrong thing to do because it is not driven by clinical needs, it is driven by cost pressures.  Any changes in hospitals must be justified on medical grounds - not simply on the basis of  cost saving as we are seeing at Lewisham,”  the Labour leader said.

But it was a partial reprieve for the hospital, after the special administrator appointed to sort out the neighbouring South London NHS Trust, which is running up debts at a rate of £1.3 million a week, proposed that the A&E department at Lewisham should be closed and replaced with an “urgent care unit”.

That proposal was seen as deeply unfair to Lewisham, a successful trust, and triggered a grassroots backlash with 15,000 local residents marching in support of the hospital last weekend.

Acknowledging the protests in the Commons today, Mr Hunt said to ensure NHS reconfiguration decisions improved safety, he had asked Sir Bruce Keogh to examine the clinical implications of closing Lewisham’s A&E.

Sir Bruce warned it would disadvantage local residents, especially the frail and elderly, and recommended a smaller A&E unit, open 24 hours a day and with senior consultant cover, should be retained at Lewisham.

Accepting the recommendation, Mr Hunt said the  slimmed down A&E would see “up to 75 per cent” of the patients currently treated compared with the 50 per cent the special administrator calculated would attend an urgent care unit.

The decision was condemned as a fudge after the health secretary said his compromise solution would increase costs but would only “marginally” increase the financial risk. The health department put the extra cost at £2 million a year.

 Julia Manning, chief executive of the think tank 2020 Health, said: “Mr Hunt is delaying the inevitable and costing the taxpayer more. Sentimentality and politics have left us with a solution that is unsustainable and will have to be revisited yet again in the future”.

Sir Steve Bullock, Mayor of Lewisham, said the council was taking legal advice on applying for judicial review. “The Secretary of State is riding roughshod over the people of Lewisham. These plans have been roundly rejected by local people, by the staff who work in the hospital and by local GPs.  This is not the end of the matter,” he said.

Chris Ham, chief executive of the Kings Fund said “‘South London Healthcare NHS Trust has longstanding and serious financial problems so no change is not an option. With a number of other trusts also facing serious financial challenges, it is vital that these problems are resolved before it becomes necessary to invoke the failure process. This will require stronger political leadership than we have seen in the past.”


View the original article here