It’s Not A Green Light, It’s A Red One
A brief summary of the situation in the post Lansley decision on our local NHS from Save KGH campaign Headquarters.
Health authorities have been quick to seize on the news that Andrew Lansley has accepted the Independent Reconfiguration Panel’s recommendation to adopt Health for North East London’s plan for our local hospital trust to reduce health services at King George Hospital and increase services at Queen’s Hospital Romford ........ but it’s not going to happen yet.
The CQC has demanded that before any changes can be made, a lot of work needs to be done to overcome severe failings in the current health service provision. So serious are these concerns to patient safety that the CQC has imposed emergency measures to move planned caesarean sections from Queens to the Homerton in Hackney, Queens has been restricted to 20 births a day and Kings to 7 and women from Essex will have to re-book with Essex hospitals.
When announcing his decision, Andrew Lansley said: “Patient safety and quality of care must be our top priority. I support the CQC’s findings and the decisions taken by the local NHS to support safe care at the Trust. When we can be sure that these decisions have resulted in sustainable improvements in the quality of services for local people, the next set of decisions ... will be implemented.”
Before the Health4NEL’s plan can be implemented, the CQC has told the Trust to develop an action plan to address the 73 recommendations which it has said are needed to ensure a real and sustainable improvement in patient safety and experience. They will then monitor how the plan is applied and progress made before any of Health4NEL’s plan can be activated.
The main problems which will need to be overcome first are:
- Maternity is considered the worst concern – poor service culture, staff shortages especially midwives and paediatricians, lack of learning from maternal deaths and incidents, abusive behaviour by some staff to patients and colleagues, lack of leadership by senior management.
- A+E unsafe working practices, delays and bottlenecks, struggling to cope with the volume of patients, especially during winter, lack of staff – in July 2011 there was a 31% vacancy of A+E consultants.
- Radiology insufficient radiography cover, low standard of work, inappropriate patient facilities due to lack of beds.
- Delays in day surgery and radiology treatment affecting the impact of treatment and care.
- Staff shortages less than 50% of staff at Queens are permanent, high levels of staff turnover, sickness, recruitment difficulties, high levels of vacancies – in June 2011 there was a 18% vacancy of nurses.
It is unlikely that these problems will be solved quickly. Cynthia Bowyer the Chief Executive of the CQC said: “We have been forcing the Trust to address issues on a short term basis but we have real concerns about safety in the mid to longer term.”
The biggest obstacle to the implementation of the changes is capacity. Health4NEL’s plan is based upon reducing the number of patients at Kings and increasing them at Queens. However, it is clear that Queens is not coping with its current level of patients, so that the CQC supports a recommendation to permanently cap the number of maternal patients admitted to Queens.
This is why the CQC intervened with its emergency measures to reduce the number of maternity patients at Queens now. Maternity capacity levels are now becoming a problem at Whipps Cross and Newham hospitals, which will need to have additional facilities provided to cope with any increase in maternity patients. Queens capacity problems are also evident in A+E, radiology and day surgery.
To compound the problem, the Trust’s workforce strategy for 2010-2015 states: “To achieve the cost reduction plan the Trust anticipates that the headcount will need to reduce by circa 850 FTE (including temporary staff).” The CQC has found an increase in patient throughput. As this staffing reduction is part of Health4NEL’s case for supporting its plan, it shows a fatal flaw in this strategy.
The one good thing that has come out of all this is that there is formal recognition of concerns which have been dismissed or ignored in the past.
However, the bad thing that has come about is the adverse publicity about Kings and particulary Queens, which will make future recruitment even more difficult.
Once the Trust has been able to demonstrate to the CQC that it has solved its problems on a sustainable basis, the Health4NEL plan can go ahead.......... but are these problems solvable given the rise in population, lack of finance, staffing difficulties? If they are solvable, how long will it take?
Helen Zammett

We should make a real fuss about making sure the conditions are met. But the main point is that the “independent” panel’s report recommends that the changes, including the closure of A&E and maternity at KGH should “proceed without delay”. It supports the plans for polyclinics instead. It pooh-poohs concerns about transport and access and about the population needing local hospital facilities. It supports everything the “Save King George “ campaign disagreed with. It even says that the proposed re-organisation is the only way to solve the obvious problems centred on an over-burdened, under-resourced Queens’ hospital. It supports the BHRUT line entirely. We need to get the campaign back on the road! I’m glad IDS is raising the issue with the Prime Minister, but we have to put some clear public support behind such complaints by MPs. Let’s get together to discuss what must be done!
ReplyDeleteThe so-called "independence" of the review panel is highly suspect. Certainly at an earlier stage of the process the "independent" experts were all from neighbouring hospitals where they were likely to lose their services if King George was not killed off.
ReplyDeleteDespite what the IRP has claimed, many of the GPs in this area are totally OPPOSED to these plans. There are some who have appeared at public meetings to support the proposals; and, cynic that I am, I wonder what their promised reward is for that support!
And just to underline Bob's point, some of the out-patient clinics at King George are being relocated to the Loxford Polyclinic where there is hardly any parking facility to be worthy of the name. And what will fill the space vacated at King George? A POLYCLINIC. I would not trust the NHS administrators to organise a vicarage tea party.
To confirm the lunacy of Andrew Lansbury, the
ReplyDeleteNHS has now announced that ALL pregnant women have the right to elect to have Caesarian Section irrespective of whether it is medically necessary or not.How does this equate with a reduction of maternity services, and cost to the Trust? One can foresee women in labour being
sent to chelsford,colchester,and Ipswich The
stated aim of the NHS is "free at the point of delivery" but we do not want the "Point of Delivery" (excuse the pun) 50 or 100 miles away.
Commenting as one born by Caesarian sction I wonder whether, in these allegedly more enlightened and democratic times, the foetus ought to be consulted?
ReplyDeleteDopeyf: The proposed guidelines on Caesareans were issued by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, not by Andrew Lansley.
ReplyDeleteWhilst a Caesarean Section is estimated to cost the NHS £800 more than a natural birth, this statistic does not take into account the costs to the NHS of rectifying problems that can often occur during a natural birth.
This is a very complex issue, with strongly-held views on either side of the argument.
N.I.C.E is still an NHS organisation, with members appointed by Lansbury, confirmation,that the left hand is separated from the right hand by infinity
ReplyDeleteDopeyf: who is this chap 'Lansbury' you keep referring to?
ReplyDeleteAnd could you tell me which of the very highly medically-qualified executive directors and non-execs he has appointed?
And how he presumably 'fiddles' the independent committees that advise the Institute, in order to introduce medical advice that upsets you?
George Lansbury, Leader of the Labour Party, 1932-1935.
ReplyDeleteDopeyf has probably just got confused with that other profit of death - Angela Lansbury from Murder She Wrote?
ReplyDeletei 'understand' that the Managers have to make tense decisions regarding our local health services..it is just that i 'can't see how they can justify it!!' It IS all too clear that the Queen's cannot cope..and 'sorting out the problems' will include a higher criteria before Admission and/or shorter bed stay!
ReplyDeleteWhich is APPALLING!
If one is Ill they need a Hospital with all the Doctors and Nurses, end of! Shorter bed stays just 'cost more' as..often the Patient should not have gone home so soon AND IS RE-ADMITTED 'sometimes WORSE!' and a higher Admission Criteria not only is cruel, but costs the NHS more as..the Patient deteriorates and needs more care/needs Urgent Care Anyway and a longer stay owing to the delay!
i think the Nhs should be left alone. Completely!It is too much tampered with! Reduce the Govt spend in other ways, not basic services! i read in the Camden Newspaper yesterday that 'Paramedic Assts (with only 8wks training!) are gradually replacing Paramedics in the Ambulances!
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE GOVT THAT IT CANNOT PROVIDE PROPER HEALTH CARE WITHOUT DETERIORATING THE SERVICE!!
I would like to see Business Talent (proper talent, self made/self taught) running the Nhs, rather than the Managements at the moment - not all of which are specialised in their Management Roles and so..not as capable as they could be!
That's only my opinion, but I AM HORRIFIED AT THE SHAPE THE NHS IS TAKING! IT SHOULD BE A FREE AND LIMITLESS SERVICE..cut the cost of other Govt Depts, perhaps Overseas Aid or Warmongering!
Susan - your comment that the NHS should be a 'free and limitless service' is largely the reason for its dreadful state today.
ReplyDeleteThe NHS was designed to cope with a much smaller population overall, and with a relatively small cohort of the elderly (who use most of the resources). You should also compare the breadth of treatments available in 1947 with those of 2011.
The NHS has also (understandably) never been able to resolve the conflict between doing the utmost for the individual and doing what is best for the majority. As B21's esteemd editor would say: Discuss.
I see that Heather Mullin has been appointed to oversee the closure - a bit like putting Dracula in charge of the blood bank.
ReplyDelete