Posts Tagged ‘Mid Staffordshire’

“Improvement still needed at Mid Staffs”

Healthcare Republic - 28th July 2010 3:35 pm

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has announced further improvement is needed at Mid-Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust, a year after it was revealed that hundreds of patients had died unnecessary deaths at the hospital.

Following a review of care at the trust, the CQC acknowledged ‘significant improvement’ but said there were still concerns about staff absences and waiting times in A&E.

‘Mortality rates are declining, there are more nurses, and patients are generally positive about their care,’ the review concludes.

Read more at Healthcare Republic.

Public inquiry into Mid-Staffs scandal announced

BBC Health - 10th June 2010 8:48 am

There will be a full public inquiry into the scandal-hit Stafford Hospital, the government has announced.

The Tories had promised the probe in opposition after reviews had criticised “appalling” standards which were said to have caused needless deaths.

Campaigners consistently said it was the only way to uncover the failings, but previous ministers had resisted.

Health Secretary Andrew Lansley said the families of those who had died deserved to know how it had happened.

Read more at BBC Health.

Hospital death rates a “poor measure of quality”

BBC Health - 21st April 2010 11:21 am

Death rates are a poor measure of hospital care and should not be used to trigger public inquiries, experts say.

The BMJ analysis argued the figures were a “poor test of quality” and urged inspectors to rely on other measures instead.

It contrasts with the pressure mounting on the Care Quality Commission to pay more attention to death rates produced by Dr Foster, a private research group.

The NHS regulator said death rates was just one part of the armoury.

The two experts in disease monitoring, Professor Richard Lilford, from Birmingham University, and Peter Pronovost, from Johns Hopkins University in the US, criticised the way death rates were used to castigate Stafford Hospital over the past year.

It was widely reported that an extra 400 people may have died as a result of poor standards at the hospital - a figure which was based on average death rates. But the experts said the claims were “precarious”.

They concluded death rates were too blunt and were only being “kept alive by well-meaning decision-makers”.

Read more at BBC Health.

Stafford Hospital inquiry cost £1.7m

BBC Health - 16th March 2010 8:15 pm

An independent inquiry into “appalling” levels of care at Stafford Hospital cost taxpayers £1.7m, it has emerged.

Patients were neglected by staff and management were too focused on targets, Robert Francis QC said in his 900-page report last month.

The Healthcare Commission revealed the hospital’s high death rate last year.

The government has defended the figure but Cure The NHS Campaigner Julie Bailey, who wants a public inquiry, said the report was a “waste of money”.

She said: ”The first thing the Department of Health - the government - said to us was a public inquiry would cost too much.

“We feel the expense is just a total waste of money because we have learned very little from this inquiry.”

There were at least 400 more deaths than expected at the hospital between 2005 to 2008, the Healthcare Commission report said last March.

This latest investigation into what went wrong, which made 18 recommendations, took five months to compile but has not satisfied many relatives.

Read more at BBC Health.

Whistleblow: damned if you do, damned if you don’t

By Mike Broad - 26th February 2010 1:12 am

The latest report on Stafford Hospital is the most revealing yet. Why? Because it lifts the lid on the management culture at the trust.

You could be forgiven for switching off at the mention of another report into Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust - there’s been a few over the past year. But there are still some important lessons the Department of Health has yet to learn.

The independent inquiry paints a truly disturbing picture. In A&E, the emergency assessment unit and a number of the wards there were some serious and repeated failures in care. Vulnerable patients were neglected. Mistakes happened but because of weak governance issues weren’t addressed and the organisation didn’t learn.

The report suggests that the hospital’s management focused on costs and targets at the expense of quality. Demoralised, understaffed teams just kept their heads down and got on with it.

Why didn’t more of them speak up? This is the question the GMC would like answered. This week, Niall Dickson, chief executive of the GMC, said: “The report does raise questions about how doctors and other professionals respond when they see poor quality care. Our guidance, Good Medical Practice, which is the foundation of good care and medical professionalism makes it absolutely clear that all doctors must make the care of their patient their first concern.

“If any doctor has reason to think that patient safety is, or may be, seriously compromised then they must take steps to put the matter right. If doctors have concerns that a member of the team may not be fit to practise they must take appropriate steps without delay. This includes raising concerns locally and, if there are still concerns about the safety of patients they should inform the relevant regulatory body.”

Do doctors really need reminding of this? Probably not. I’d take a guess that doctors in the units involved at Mid Staffs were well aware of their responsibilities but knew that if they put their heads above the parapet there might be a huge personal cost.

As the inquiry has found, the doctors were dealing with a fearsome management culture described as secretive and bullying. Don’t get me wrong, if doctors were complicit in poor care they deserve to be investigated by the GMC as some are now being.

But, who would willingly become a whistleblower in the NHS? We’ve supposedly had protective legislation since 1998 and yet doctors continue to be drummed out of trusts for raising concerns. 

Look at Kim Holt and Ramon Niekrash for recent examples. There are plenty of others.

Maybe that’s where the GMC’s attention should be. We should also be concentrating on the senior managers - they set the priorities and the level of resource to deliver them. Why is there no regulator that can bring managers to book individually? For me they’re more responsible than an under trained and over worked nurse.

I also believe that patient groups have a strong case in calling for a full public inquiry. There are some bigger issues here. None of the reports have so far resolved the wider systemic failings that allow an underperforming hospital to be highly rated and awarded foundation status. None of the reviews have included a wider discussion on targets and their ability to distort clinical priorities.

Andy Burnham has said “this was ultimately a local failure”. He needs it to be seen as an isolated case because there’s an election around the corner. While it’s doubtful so many problems will present again within one trust, many other hospitals are going to under intense pressure in the next few years and it doesn’t strike me that we’ve adequately dealt with the root causes of this dysfunction.

“Doctors are obliged to whistleblow over care”

By Mike Broad - 25th February 2010 3:26 pm

The GMC has urged hospital doctors to speak out if they see poor quality care in the wake of an inquiry into Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust.

An independent inquiry, chaired by Robert Francis QC, said this week that the trust had become driven by targets and cost-cutting.

Last year, a Healthcare Commission investigation revealed that at least 400 more people had died at the hospital between 2005 and 2008 than would have been expected due to poor care.

Niall Dickson, chief executive of the GMC, said: “The report does raise questions about how doctors and other professionals respond when they see poor quality care. If any doctor has reason to think that patient safety is, or may be, seriously compromised then they must take steps to put the matter right. If doctors have concerns that a member of the team may not be fit to practise they must take appropriate steps without delay.”

He added: “Doctors with management responsibility must make sure that there are systems in place through which colleagues can raise concerns about risks to patients.”

The GMC is investigating the conduct and performance of a number of doctors at Stafford Hospital following referral by the medical director.

The inquiry report claims poor care caused “unimaginable distress and suffering” for patients.

The culture of the trust was not conducive to providing good care for patients or providing a supportive working environment for staff, the report finds.

A bullying management style was outlined. “A high priority was placed on the achievement of targets, and in particular the A&E waiting time target. The pressure to meet this generated a fear, whether justified or not, that failure to meet targets could lead to the sack,” the report says.

The consultant body largely dissociated itself from management, the report says, and often adopted a fatalistic approach to management issues and plans. There was also a lack of trust in management leading to reluctance in raising concerns.

Staff morale was low and absence and sickness rates high.

The report also points to a lack of openness by the foundation trust board. It cites an incident where an attempt was made to persuade a consultant to alter an adverse report to the coroner, and questioned how candid the trust was prepared to be about things that went wrong.

Governance was weak at the foundation trust, with sub-standard clinical audit, complaints handling and incident reporting.

Appraisal and professional development were a low priority, and deficient performance was not addressed. The report says this was starkly evidenced by two Royal College of Surgeons’ reviews of the hospital’s surgical division and the dysfunction brought to light by them.

The report says: “The few instances of reports by whistleblowers of which the inquiry was made aware suggest that the trust has not offered the support and respect due to those brave enough to take this step. The handling of these cases is unlikely to encourage others to come forward, and the responses to the investigation of the concerns raised have been ineffective.”

BMA council chairman Hamish Meldrum commented: “It is particularly worrying that a culture of fear exists in some hospitals and one which prevents doctors and other health professionals from speaking out when they have concerns. In many cases doctors’ concerns are not heeded and this can inhibit their ability to take further action. We agree with the inquiry’s findings that there needs to be a much greater degree of engagement with clinicians in the management process.”

Some clinical staff were described as uncaring by patients at the inquiry, and the report heavily criticised the standards of nursing and personal care provided.

The report says: “Failure to ensure a proper level of personal cleanliness and hygiene degrades patients, aggravating the feelings of illness, disability and separation from home and familiar surroundings. A wholly unacceptable standard was tolerated on some of the trust’s wards for a significant number of patients.”

Since the original report last year, inspectors have been carrying out regular checks and say that care is now safe.

The government has resisted calls for a full public inquiry, calling it a “local failure”, despite pressure from patient groups and Conservative leader David Cameron.

Read the full report.

Read a timeline on Stafford Hospital.

Mid Staffs was driven by targets and cost-cutting

BBC Health - 24th February 2010 1:15 pm

Hospital patients were left “sobbing and humiliated” by uncaring staff, an investigation has found.

The independent inquiry said the Mid Staffordshire NHS Trust had become driven by targets and cost-cutting.

The report - the latest in a long line of critical reviews into the trust - said the poor care caused “unimaginable distress and suffering”.

It outlines instances where patients were “routinely neglected”, and documents cases where patients were left in soiled sheets which relatives were forced to wash.

Patients were left alone, leading to falls - some fatal - which were sometimes not reported.

Half of the patients and relatives who gave evidence also cited problems getting enough food and drink.

The report criticised the “ineffective” management which were too often concerned with hitting targets, particularly in A&E, as well as the “lack of compassion” and “uncaring attitude” which was too often demonstrated by staff.

But staffing levels were also said to be too low because the trust was trying to slash costs by £10m.

Read more at BBC Health.

Basildon is more pressing than climate change

By Mike Broad - 27th November 2009 4:24 pm

A long time ago, I studied a bit of meteorology. My abiding memories are not about occluded fronts and cumulonimbus clouds, but a general wonder at the complexity of the discipline. 

Every prevailing weather system is the product of an incredible range of influences from solar cycles and jet streams to ocean currents and the shape of land masses.

There aren’t many things more complicated than a human body, but the weather is probably one of them.

So, to suggest we now understand the weather - for all our sophistication in modelling - is frankly ridiculous. The climate is changing. Human activity probably does have something to do with it. It’s probably worth lowering our carbon emissions, even if in the fullness of time it proves to be less significant than most currently believe. As far as I’m concerned, for the non-expert, that’s about as definitive as you can be.

So, why on earth are doctors’ representatives banging on about it? Doctors from “around the world” have launched the International Health and Climate Council to pressure governments into action over climate change. And The Lancet has backed it up with some articles on the health consequences.

Of course, we should all do our bit to reduce our carbon footprint (and I like to think I do more than most). But, is President Obama’s thinking at the upcoming Copenhagen Summit on Climate Change really going to be influenced by a bunch of doctors and their trade mags offering up sound bites on issues that are far removed from their areas of expertise?

I somehow doubt it. And yet this week they’ve taken the opportunity to pump more hot air into the atmosphere about the health consequences. 

It’s funny, but I didn’t hear many of them talking about the real health stories this week at Basildon and Thurrock NHS Trust and Colchester Hospital - not in public anyway. 

We’ve got a real crisis on our hands and there’s no nice PR opportunity in it. Standards faltered at Basildon and Colchester, as they did at Mid Staffs, despite a supposedly tight regulatory system. The consequences were severe.

A report by Dr Foster Intelligence rated a dozen hospitals as “significantly underperforming”, despite nine of them being rated good or excellent by official regulator the Care Quality Commission.

Seven hospitals were also found to have considerably higher mortality rates for the past five years.

It raises difficult questions: how do we really tell if a unit is good? Do our current targets subvert clinical priorities? How do we provide a more quality-focused regulatory system that supports learning and development?

These are the issues doctors’ leaders should be debating, not Brazilian rainforests or polar bears. While there are people better qualified for this, few are in a better position to help improve standards in our hospitals.

Essex hospital failings prompt calls for reform

BBC Health - 8:27 am

Calls are mounting for urgent reform to the way hospitals are regulated after a report found a catalogue of failings at two hospitals in Essex.

The independent regulator highlighted an unusually high death rate and poor hygiene, including blood-spattered kit.

Basildon and Thurrock NHS trust said concerns were not indicative of wider problems, but a taskforce has been sent in to force through improvements.

Most inpatient care is provided at Basildon University Hospital, which has 777 beds, and outpatient care at Orsett hospital in Grays.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) rated the trust as “good” overall in October. But a new report from an unannounced inspection team carried out by the CQC found evidence of sub-standard care.

The inspectors reported: floors and curtains stained with blood; badly soiled mattresses in the A&E department with stains soaked through to the foam filling; blood-splattered on trays used to carry equipment; items that should only be used once still in use; and, equipment in the resuscitation room that was past the use-by date.

The inspectors criticised a poor care environment in A&E, in particular a lack of privacy for patients. They also highlighted inadequate arrangements to treat children, with few specialist paediatric staff.

The CQC has asked the regulator of foundation trusts, Monitor, to take action.

An expert taskforce will be sent into the trust with a remit to drive rapid improvements in patient care.

Read more at BBC Health.  

Stafford Hospital inquiry “too narrow” for patients

BBC Health - 15th September 2009 7:24 pm

A solicitor representing campaigners has condemned a second inquiry into failings at Stafford Hospital as “a narrow, private process”.

Richard Stein, who is acting for the Cure the NHS (CtN) group, was speaking on the opening day of the inquiry. He said many relatives felt other reports had already established what happened to patients.

In March, a Healthcare Commission report said “appalling” emergency care had led to patients “dying needlessly”. It also condemned the local NHS trust for allowing unqualified staff to carry out checks on patients.

Stein said CtN now intended to seek a judicial review of the limited scope of the independent inquiry.

“It’s extremely disappointing for patients and for bereaved relatives that it’s going to be a narrow, private process rather than the open, public and all-embracing one that the people of Stafford need and deserve,” he said.

Read more on BBC Health.