Archive for June, 2009

Practice-based commissioning extended to hospitals

Pulse - 30th June 2009 6:50 pm

Practice-based commissioning is to be extended to cover hospital staff in a move that may intensify the competition for funding between primary and secondary care.

Under the plans, outlined by health minister Lord Darzi, hospital trusts will be encouraged to buy in services under PBC.

Consultants, hospital nurses and allied health professionals - including physiotherapists and midwives - will be given the opportunity to reorganise healthcare services and develop proposals for new income streams.

Lord Darzi, speaking on the anniversary of his NHS Next Stage Review, said widening out commissioning powers was now seen as a more effective way of driving improvements than setting a new array of central targets.

But PBC leaders warned the plan risked further undermining GP engagement in PBC, and could divert money into hospitals’ coffers.

Read more at Pulse.

Doctors must take leading role in quality debate

By Mike Broad - 2:37 pm

The medial profession and the NHS face their most serious challenges ever, claimed the chairman of BMA council at the annual representatives meeting.

Dr Hamish Meldrum told delegates in Liverpool that both the financial and political crises affecting the country would have repercussions for doctors.

But Dr Meldrum reassured members that the BMA would protect the profession. He said: “There is no doubt that there are going to be those who want to put pressure on our incomes, the medical workforce and our pensions.

Whilst we should be realistic and not expect inflation-busting pay rises and an infinite expansion in medical manpower, I can assure you that we are not going to allow doctors to be scapegoats for the failures of politicians or bankers.”

He re-iterated the BMA’s opposition to marketisation, the continued use of management consultants and additional PFI projects in the NHS. And he called on the profession to support the BMA’s new campaign Look After Our NHS, launched earlier this month. 

Dr Meldrum did call on doctors to do their bit to improve quality and thus efficiency in the NHS. He said doctors could “vastly” improve the outcomes data for their services and “look seriously” at the issue of service redesign.

“I know some of you will think we are dancing to the government’s tune. No way! I’m talking about difficult decisions but ones that are made for evidence-based, clinical reasons not purely for political or financial expediency.”

He also called for more emphasis on lifestyle services and a healthy ageing strategy to reduce dependency in older age.

He finished his speech by urging doctors to show leadership, and get involved, with medico-political issues. He said: “We have a choice. We can be cynical, pessimistic, worry about being tainted by association and criticise from the sidelines….alternatively, we can keep talking, keep involved, keep engaged and take a leading role, not with some sort of blind acceptance but with our eyes wide open.”

WTD compliance figures challenged

By Mike Broad - 29th June 2009 1:37 pm

Only 200 clinical rotas in England require more time to implement the 48-hour working week for junior doctors, claims the government.

Health secretary Andy Burnham gave a two-year delay from implementing the Working Time Directive, which comes into force on 1 August, to just 3% of the rotas involved in a review of 6,646 across 247 NHS Trusts.

The rotas given a derogation included those providing 24-hour immediate patient care, supra specialist services and units in rural and isolated areas.

Dr Wendy Reid, the Department of Health’s national clinical advisor on the WTD, said: “A huge amount of work has been done to get us to the stage we’re at now.

“The royal colleges have provided tremendous support and, over the last six months, have formed a real link with strategic health authorities and worked on those 6,600-odd rotas.”

But the high level of rota compliance was disputed my medical leaders. Recent data from the strategic health authorities showed a more significant and worsening problem.

Mr John Black, president of the Royal College of Surgeons, said: “We’re at a loss to understand the success the DoH is claiming in addressing this issue. The relatively low numbers of rotas applying for derogation does not reflect the true story being played out at the frontline of hospital care.

“The situation is very serious indeed and misrepresentation of the nature and scale of the problems that hospitals will face in providing safe and effective services to patients in the coming months is grossly irresponsible and does a great disservice to those who rightly expect safe and high-quality care.”

The college has argued that trainee surgeons need to be able to work a 65-hour week in order to be properly trained.

Matt Jameson Evans, co-chair of Remedy, said: “Derogation for 200 rotas will have negligible impact on the huge numbers of non-compliant rotas that exist in reality. This is the year when rota gaps have reduced many training opportunities to just fire fighting service shortages.”

The BMA was disappointed by the derogation and urged the trusts involved to ensure their rotas are compliant in two years time. Dr Andy Thornley, chair of the BMA’s junior doctors committee, called on the government to focus on the impact to doctors’ training.

“We’re worried about how compliance has been achieved in some areas. In the last minute rush to maintain patient services, opportunities for trainees to learn new procedures have been reduced,” he said.

“If we do not equip our junior doctors with the necessary training we risk jeopardising the levels of medical expertise that patients deserve.”

The DoH’s Reid said the government were committed to sustainable compliance and would continue scrutinising rotas.

She said: “It is not the end on 1st August but the beginning. We need trainees to accurately report and have their hours honestly reflected. And the royal colleges and strategic health authorities have to continue working through this with trusts.”

An independent scrutiny panel reviewed all the services requiring derogation. The panel was chaired by Dr Judith Hulf, president of the Royal College of Anaesthetists and joint chair of the EWTD Reference Group, and also included representatives from the royal colleges, BMA, SHAs and NHS Employers.

A guide to the WTD.

BMA to tell the public about NHS break up

By Mike Broad - 12:26 pm

The BMA is to mount a public information campaign against the commercialisation and break up of the NHS in England.

A motion proposing the way forward for the BMA’s new Look After Our NHS campaign was hotly debated at the union’s annual representatives meeting. The BMA is already raising awareness of the campaign among the medical profession.

Representatives voted for the campaign to protect GP surgeries, district general hospitals and community care and keep them publically funded. They also supported training opportunities being maintained for students and juniors and that the BMA council launch a significant public information campaign.

The latter required a two thirds majority among the representatives present at the request of the BMA’s treasurer - because he felt there are significant cost implications.

Dr Jacky Davis, CCSC member and the motion’s proposer, said: “What’s the evidence for turning the NHS into a market? That’s easy - there isn’t any. Why is it wrong to turn the NHS into a market? That’s easy too - because it’s bad for patients.”

However, a strong call for the BMA to organise a national march and rally for a publically funded NHS was rejected. Despite 53% of representatives voting in favour, it also required a two thirds majority.

BMA treasurer Dr David Pickersgill warned delegates that the cost of organising a march in London would be between £300,000 and £400,000. This was challenged by Dr Davis, who said: “The expenses are a red herring. Remedy spent a very small amount on their march. If you compare the amount of money this would cost with the refurbishment of BMA House - it’s duck houses.”

BMA House was recently refurbished for £12m. A spokesperson for Remedy UK said that its high profile marches in 2007 over the MTAS debacle, which were attended by over 12,000 people, cost the organisation about £4,000.

Council chairman Dr Hamish Meldrum told delegates: “I’m ambivalent on the march. You wave a flag, blow a whistle, but do you achieve much? Is this the way we want to take the campaign forward? I doubt it.”

Dr Ian Banks, a member of the BMA council, said: “The outside perception of what the BMA is doing is not good among the public or doctors. We need to march on the streets. It could be the turning point for the BMA. It could be critical to the future of the NHS. We need to show people we care.”

Another part of the motion, calling for a day of industrial action by doctors over the privatisation of the NHS, received little support from representatives.

Public fears NHS cuts and longer waiting lists

BBC Health - 28th June 2009 9:19 pm

Nine out of 10 people fear that NHS services could be cut and waiting times rise as the government tackles the recession, a survey suggests.

The British Medical Association poll of 1,000 people also found three quarters believed that other public services should take a financial hit instead. The union said it showed the depth of feeling about the NHS.

Managers have warned the health service is facing a funding shortfall of up to £10bn for the three years after 2011.

NHS spending is already guaranteed until then, but many predict the government will be forced to rein back on public spending after that date to pay off the debts incurred in bailing out the banks.

Read more at BBC Health.

Government abandons swine flu containment efforts

HSJ - 26th June 2009 3:47 pm

The prevalence of swine flu in some parts of the country means that the government is abandoning attempts to contain the virus and is instead moving towards a policy of outbreak management.

The number of cases in London and the West Midlands is high enough for people with swine flu to be clinically diagnosed rather than have the virus confirmed by laboratory reports.

In order to keep track of the strength of the virus, swabbing will now only take place in a small number of cases. And doctors have been advised to use the drug Tamiflu more selectively by targeting only those people with symptoms.

The result of this is that those who have come into contact with somebody suffering from swine flu will probably no longer be given the drug as a precaution.

Read more at HSJ.

Grounded by lessons in communication

By Stephen Campion, chief executive of HCSA - 2:00 pm

Thank goodness it’s Friday I thought as I left an HCSA council meeting last week preparing for the 4.25pm flight from Leeds to Southampton.

The flight actually left at 9 o’clock that evening and arrived at 10.15 pm. Flybe (or as I now call it Flymaybe) claimed that the delay was due to a “technical failure” which cut no ice with my fellow passengers, many of whom said that this was a frequent occurrence - particularly when insufficient passengers had bought tickets to make the scheduled flight economic.

I thought about this when I received an email this week from a consultant asking my views on who should tell a patient that his/her operation had been postponed. Should it be the doctor, manager, ward clerk, nurse or patient liaison officer? So far as Flybe was concerned the answer is simple; no-one has that responsibility. All the information you need to know is on the departure board which unhelpfully read “waiting” or some similar unhelpful advice.

And the NHS? Communications are important. Of course the patient must be told why the operation had to be postponed; ideally the patient should be warned that this could happen and be reassured as to future treatment and care. Communications are vital in the NHS, not just the doctor/patient relationship but in the wider context of its management.

And then I read in the Health Services Journal about how foundation trusts are facing real difficulties in this recession: The chief executive of one NHS trust with a large PFI scheme told HSJ there was “absolutely no way” the trust could take forward its plans for a new hospital and still achieve foundation status.

The chief executive asked not to be named as the trust does not want to anger Monitor in advance of its application for foundation status, but said: “What they have effectively done is cancel the rest of the PFI pipeline. I’m not even sure the Department of Health knows what’s going on here.”

Well I doubt that Flmaybe can learn from the Department of Health - but like the anonymous chief executive I do wonder what is going on now we have left the era of boom and entering one of bust. Perhaps we will be told!

For brave read stupid on altruistic kidney donation

By Mr Paul Thorpe - 11:53 am

We have two kidneys for a reason - if one packs up, we can live on the other. So what would bring you to getting rid of one of your giblets when you still definitely require it?

It is, of course, incredibly sad when someone experiences the hellish existence of life with a failing vital organ. I can fully understand that if a blood relative or lifelong partner is likely to die while on a transplant list, then one would consider a live donation.

However, am I alone in not sharing the same journalistic enthusiasm championing the rise in altruistic donation this week?

Dewy eyed reporters were in raptures over the ‘brave’ people who willingly gave up their kidneys for general use on the transplant list. In medicine, the term ‘brave’ is often a polite way of saying ‘stupid’ or ‘reckless’, and this lot fall firmly into the same category.

Has anyone spotted the flaw of middle aged people giving up a kidney with 20 years plus expected of the singleton? What happens when their own renal function starts to pack up? Won’t they just be contributing to the problem they are trying to solve, having to go out and find their own altruistic donor?

The claims that ‘live’ organs are rejected less than post mortem ones may be true, but surely the point here is that we need a more open and aggressive policy towards increasing the number of donors - like the Iberian countries, where not only are you more likely to be placed in a persistent vegetative state by another road user, but there is also an ‘opt out’ rather than ‘opt in’ organ donation/harvest policy.

Needless to say, they have fewer people on the waiting list.

Call me selfish, but I want to keep my filtering tanks the way they are, and only my family need apply for any consideration - the rest of you - hands off my kidneys!

Weak appointment committees threaten safety

By Kathy Oxtoby - 9:27 am

Some foundation trusts and independent sector treatment centres are foregoing the involvement of royal colleges when appointing consultants potentially putting patients at risk.

Doctors’ leaders warn that the consultant role is being devalued because these organisations are failing to vet their new appointments properly. Foundation trusts and ISTCs are not obliged to appoint clinicians through a formal Advisory Appointments Committee (ACC).

Mr Richard Collins, a consultant surgeon and council member of the Royal College of Surgeons with responsibility for advisory appointment committees, said the ACC process was established “to reassure the public that the clinician appointed to a post was appropriately trained, independently accepted and ideally the best possible candidate”.

Healthcare organisations which do not use the ACC process - which involves having a royal college representative and other senior clinicians on the interview panel - could be employing doctors on the basis of who, not what, they know and some may not even be suitably qualified for the post, Mr Collins said.

Dr Jonathan Fielden, the BMA’s consultant committee chair, said not having royal college input into consultants’ appointments meant it was harder to assure the quality of the person recruited.

Dr Fielden added that being able to sidestep ACC standards meant there was the potential for foundation trusts and ISTCs to recruit clinicians on non standard contracts with fewer than the 2.5 SPAs recommended in the consultant contract.

Mr Collins stressed that the majority of appointments “go smoothly”, but said the RCS had learned of cases where sidestepping the ACC process had caused problems.

These included an organisation recruiting a general surgeon for what should have been a plastic surgeon’s post; several employers have altered the days on which the ACC sits at short notice making it impossible for a royal college advisor to attend; and a growing number are offering irregular job descriptions.

David Worskett, director of NHS Partners network, said ISTCS had “rigorous appointment procedures” in place and that they “invariably have external assessors and experts, including members of the RCS”.

He added the appointment processes were “exactly those laid down by ISTC contracts required by NHS commissioners”.

A Department of Health spokesperson said it’s recommended that ISTCs “engage” with the royal colleges when making surgical appointments and that foundation trusts should “conduct their recruitment in a way that is legally compliant”.

However, Mr Collins said: “We need an independent, professional evaluation of the suitability of people being employed to work regularly within the health service.”

He added that there should also be a similar evaluation of one-off, short term appointments.

Doctors are against market forces in NHS

By Mike Broad - 9:09 am

Doctors are extremely concerned about the impact of the independent sector on healthcare, a survey reveals.

Nine out of ten respondents said they were worried about the future of their local health services if they were left to market forces.

Dr Richard Jarvis, survey respondent and consultant in public health medicine in Liverpool, said: “The dogma that market forces produce the most efficient use of money has been shown to be catastrophically wrong by the credit crunch.”
Furthermore, 86% did not think the provision of NHS services by commercial companies was a good idea.

The poll, by BMA News, was published as health minister Lord Darzi hinted the government could be re-examining its controversial Private Finance Initiative which has funded hospitals and healthcare facilities.
Darzi said: “That model of funding may have been the right model but I have no doubt that the Department of Health will be appraising whether that it is still the model for the future or whether there are other, better models.”

BMA consultants committee chairman Dr Jonathan Fielden responded: “We would urge the Department of Health to look again at PFI. The evidence is that there needs to be a fundamental review and we need to get something sustainable in a much harsher financial climate.”

Read more on the BMA campaign Look After Our NHS.