Apparently a "DAMNING reports on the state of the National Health Service, suppressed by the government, reveal how patients’ needs have been neglected.
They diagnose a blind pursuit of political and managerial targets as the root cause of a string of hospital scandals that have cost thousands of lives.
The harsh verdict on the state of the NHS, after a spending splurge under Labour between 2000 and 2008, raises worrying questions about the future quality of the health service as budgets are squeezed.
One report, based on the advice of almost 200 top managers and doctors, says hospitals ignored basic hygiene to cram in patients to meet waiting-time targets."
So what have the people who bleated so long and loud about freedom of information done? The Times continues (my emphasis):
"Lord Darzi, the former health minister, commissioned the three reports from international consultancies to assess the progress of the NHS as it approached its 60th anniversary in 2008. They have come to light after a freedom of information request.
The first report, by the Massachusetts-based Institute for Healthcare Improvements (IHI), identified the neglect of patients as a serious obstacle to improving the NHS. “The lack of a prominent focus on patients’ interests and needs ... represents a significant barrier to shifting the trajectory of quality improvement in the NHS.”
One heading in the report says: “The patient doesn’t seem to be in the picture.” It adds: “We were struck by the virtual absence of mention of patients and families ... whether we were discussing aims and ambition for improvement, measurement of progress or any other topic relevant to quality.
“Most targets and standards appear to be defined in professional, organisational and political terms, not in terms of patients’ experience of care.”
This weekend it emerged the recommendations of the reports, intended to help the NHS improve, have not even been circulated. "
The Times report continues (my emphasis):
"The IHI report, whose interviewees included Lord Crisp, chief executive of the NHS between 2000 and 2006, also described a system of self-assessment where only 4% of trusts are externally inspected.
A similar picture emerges in the second report, by the US-based Joint Commission International. It says the “quality and integrity of [NHS]performance data is suspect”. "
The Times report continues (my emphasis):
"The third report, by the US-based Rand Corporation, expresses surprise at the lack of a requirement to identify the specific drug involved when patient accidents are reported."
More Labour mismanagement and hiding of the evidence; now do you see why they must not be allowed five more years to further ruin the UK?
No comments:
Post a Comment