JUSTICE FOR BEREAVED RELATIVES

Today is Mrs A’s birthday, at least it would be if she were still with us, so I thought that I would do something in her honour, thus Justice for Bereaved Relatives of Patients killed by the NHS, because I am one and I am sure there are many more out there in the blogosphere, just think about the Mid Staffs and Gosport Memorial.

The Bloggers Unite site is here.

You don’t need to do much, just display the photo above and write a short blog about your experience of the NHS complaints system, the attitude of the trust management and senior medics.

Or just your impression of the treatment given by the NHS.

If you really want to do more you can send your “story” to me, or even better send it to Alan Johnson the Health Secretary here.

Mrs A was subjected to abysmal surgery by a “Senior” Consultant, who managed to cut her small bowel and did not ensure an adequate blood supply to the large bowel join, which failed, she was Septic on the ward for at least three days before anything was done and ended up in Intensive care on full life support for 23 days, then she was moved 90 miles to another hospital because they “needed the bed” and on her return contracted an MRSA Bacteraemia.

In May a path report was issued stating that she had recurrent cancer, before she left hospital in July this was ignored until the end of August, and tests were done, the diagnosis was not given until November, and this consisted of “your cancer is inoperable” no prognosis or other details were given, in other words I was left to tell her after a phone call from our GP that she was going to die.

The Hospital denied, the Senior Consultant denied, the GMC decided there was no case to answer, the Healthcare Commission denied (the trust had attained foundation status after receiving a “perfect” score from them the same year), at a meeting with the CEO and the Medical Director I was told that “they didn’t know what was wrong” with my wife, after all there was only a Senior Consultant and six other doctors “looking” after her.

My MP of course didn’t want to know, he is close to the Hospital.

It has taken me almost four years to “complete” the complaints procedure, the denials and cover ups have been universal, because nobody cares, the Trust management were protecting their status, the consultant was protecting his career, the GMC were protecting the Consultant and the Healthcare Commission were protecting their decision.

Alan Johnson tells us that the NHS should be open and clear, it is about time he stood up and took responsibility, the arrival of a couple of hundred emails detailing the appalling treatment received by patients may make him think, or at least it will give him something to do for a while.


In memory of “Mrs A” 1951-2005


Angus Dei

Lord Darzi and the “new” NHS

BBC NEWS A man who alleged he was discriminated against because he was HIV positive has received £4,000 and an apology.

Tony Bell's court challenge to the standard of care he received from Craigavon Area Hospital was supported by the Equality Commission for NI.

Staff refused to perform an endoscopy on him and the Southern Health Trust said it was because of his HIV status.

The trust said that this was "entirely inappropriate" and it regretted the distress caused to Mr Bell.

Mr Bell underwent an alternative form of examination which was not completed until four months later.

"The hospital has confirmed to me that they have the facilities and appropriate procedures in place to perform endoscopy on HIV patients and I believe that they should have followed those procedures in my case and respected my dignity as a patient in their care.

"Thankfully my treatment has now been completed but I wouldn't want other HIV patients to go through a similar experience."

The trust, in settling the County Court case brought under the Disability Discrimination Act, apologised to Mr Bell for the injury to his feelings and distress experienced by him as a result.

It also agreed to undertake a review of any policies which touch upon the issue of service provision for HIV patients.

"The trust is committed to treating all patients who need our help, and we have an excellent record in improving access to our services for patients with a range of disabilities."

Equality Commission casework director Anne McKernan said people with HIV were given clear protection from discrimination under changes introduced in 2007.

All well and good, an apology is apt, but it shouldn’t have happened in the first place, where were the supervisors or managers when the decision not to treat was made? Probably in their nice air-con offices drinking bottled water.


“It is easy to dodge our responsibilities, but we cannot dodge the consequences of dodging our responsibilities.” Josiah Charles Stamp

Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

THE RUTHERFORD LEGACY

BBC NEWS A sixth person who worked in a Manchester University building used by Lord Rutherford, and contaminated by radiation and mercury, has died.

Professor Tom Whiston, 70, a psychology lecturer, died from cancer at his home in Sussex.

He occupied the building where the Nobel Prize winning scientist carried out his experiments on atomic structure using radioactive radon.

An independent inquiry into any health risks at the building is under way.
Professor Whiston is the third occupant of the Rutherford Building to have died of pancreatic cancer in the last two years.

All three worked in rooms used by the scientist for his experiments. A fourth colleague, who also worked in the building, died of a brain tumour in 1992.

A computer assistant, who also suffered from a brain tumour, died in February 2008 and in 1984 a laboratory assistant died of cancer.

An independent inquiry into possible health risks at the Rutherford Building is being carried by an outside scientist, Professor David Coggon, at the request of officials at Manchester University, and is expected to report later this year.

He is examining claims that the deaths are linked to contamination in the building, which was used by Lord Rutherford between 1907 and 1919.

The radioactivity was first uncovered in 1999, 80 years after Rutherford had left, and de-contamination work was subsequently carried out. The mercury was found more recently.

Manchester University declined to comment on Professor Whiston's death, pending the result of the Coggan investigation.

Where the hell is health and safety when you need it?


“We change the world not by what we say or do, but as a consequence of what we have become.” David R Hawkins

Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

The NHS is Screwed

BBC NEWS Health service facing 'hard slog' Investment in the NHS in the long-term is set to slow-down significantly, many are predicting.

Chancellor Alistair Darling said from 2011 public spending will rise by just 0.7% a year to help repay debts.

It is less than the 1.1% predicted last year and means the NHS is under pressure to make savings.

NHS experts said the service was ready for the "hard slog", but doctors warned the progress made in recent years could be undermined.

The health service enjoyed record rises of over 7% a year between 2002 and 2007. Even now it is getting 5.5% extra each year, but those spending levels will end in 2011.

The chancellor said in his Budget that that level of spending was safe, but from 2011 the public sector as a whole will have to cope with 0.7% annual rises.

It is not known exactly what the health service will get, but NHS managers have been working for some time on the basis that it will be little more than 1%.

In real terms - once inflation is taken into account - that could be the equivalent of a freeze or even a cut in spending.

But with the UK in the middle of a recession, NHS chiefs have acknowledged there is little option but to try to get more out of the service.

Regional health bosses have already met government officials this year to discuss how the health service can become more efficient.

The Department of Health has already announced it wants the NHS to make £2.3bn efficiency savings from the £100bn-plus budget over the next two years.

Professor John Appleby, chief economist at the King's Fund health think-tank, said: "As spending has risen in the NHS, productivity has gone the other way.

"The challenge now the service is facing much smaller rises is to tackle this.

"In a sense, the health service has got to the top of the hill. Waiting lists have fallen and reforms have been introduced so the NHS does not need those big rises it has seen in the past, but it will still be a hard slog."

But Dr Hamish Meldrum, chairman of the British Medical Association, said while he was relieved spending in the coming years was not going to be affected, he was worried about what would happen in the long-term.

"In recent years, staff in NHS trusts have worked exceptionally hard to make savings and it is very difficult to see how any more can be asked of them without damaging patient care.

"As more people lose their jobs and homes and suffer the health consequences linked to the current economic climate, increasing demands will be made on the NHS.

"It is vital that the government sticks to its promise and continues to invest, in real terms, in the health service."

So there you have it, any surplus produced by the NHS will not be used for Patients but will instead go to propping up the funding cuts.

The best way to save money and improve care is to reduce the layers of “overseers” that are supposed to be running and regulating the NHS, sack half of the managers, cut senior management and senior medical staff salaries, and make them pay into private pensions, take away the perks such as “company cars” and use the money to pay for more qualified nurses and ancillary staff.

But what do I know. I’m just a potential patient.


“A gardener, who cultivates his own garden with his own hands, unites in his own person the three different characters, of landlord, farmer, and labourer. His produce, therefore, should pay him the rent of the first, the profit of the second, and the wages of the third.” Adam Smith

Angus


Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

THE OTHER SIDE OF THE OTHER SIDE

I usually spend my time blogging having a bash at medics who give poor treatment over on NHS Behind the headlines I like to think that I am reasonably fair minded so here is an article from the BBC NEWS entitled “To err is human - but not if you're a doctor” by Dr George Fernie Medical and Dental Defence Union of Scotland.

He starts out by saying “We've all made mistakes in our work. But if you're a doctor, the consequences can be deadly.” And “urges sympathy for the beleaguered health professional.”

He then goes on to cite a BBC day time “soap”-Doctors, in which a doctor (Dr Melody Bell) who failed to spot the tell-tale symptoms of angina in a patient.

Luckily, her professional instincts rang alarm bells and she got to him shortly after he suffered a heart attack, saving his life.

And says; “Doctors are undoubtedly human like the rest of us. It's just that clinical mistakes can have dire consequences.”

Mention Dr Melody Bell's failure to spot a condition to any doctor and you'll hear them muttering "there but for the grace of God, go I"

NHS figures suggest that 850,000 patients suffer what experts call "adverse events" every year: clinical negligence, missed diagnoses, medical mistakes and more.

The toll in terms of human grief and misery is incalculable. The cost to the NHS - in effect, a cost to us - is around £6bn. But doctors suffer too.

As Sir Liam Donaldson noted in a recent Scrubbing Up, victims of medical mistakes want an apology and an assurance that the mishap won't recur.

Yet the current blame culture in healthcare risks crushing individual medics for one regretful error.”

Then goes on to use a couple of examples of “things that went wrong”-

Take the case of Dr A, a surgeon who mistakenly removed a functioning kidney. At a hearing of the doctors' regulator, the General Medical Council, he admitted his fault.

The GMC panel hearing his case accepted that shortcomings by his hospital had contributed to the mistake.

It acknowledged that support from the hospital was poor.

It observed that doctors, nurses and managers all communicated badly, leaving our medic - and through him, the patient - vulnerable.

Failure was "a team effort". But it was the surgeon who took the rap.
He was found to have seriously failed in his clinical responsibilities and suspended for a year.

And-“Consider also the experience of Dr B, a young GP who was called to the home of a 15-year-old girl complaining of a severe headache, fever and pains in her legs.

The GP examined the girl for any rash or bruising, the tell-tale signs of meningococcal septicaemia - a bacterial infection of the blood, commonly known as blood poisoning and didn't see any.
He did the right thing in examining her, but crucially made no medical note of it.”

It is worth reading the whole article.

I think that most of us know that Doctors don’t deliberately set out to harm patients, unless your name is Shipman of course, but the difference is that doctors don’t fix computers or TVs they “work” on people, and if their work is not acceptable then there must be some sort of personal responsibility.

“Failure was a team effort” is a cop out, teams are made up of individuals, each individual has a personal responsibility to ensure that their “work” is carried out properly, if anyone of the team fails then the rest of the team should ensure that the “mistake” is rectified.

Personal responsibility are the keywords to better treatment, yes Doctors make mistakes, yes they are human, but when a mistake happens we deserve an explanation and an apology, we deserve to know what went wrong, we deserve to see action taken against those who have harmed us or our loved ones.

That expectation is not “blame culture” as Dr George Fernie says it is a right of patients and their families; does he think that the relatives of the Mid Staffs disaster should walk away and forget, or the relatives of the Gosport massacre should forgive? I don’t think so, and deep down I don’t think he does either, the problem I have found with Doctors is that they are not us, let me explain, doctors are seemingly unable to look at things from a patients or relatives point of view, and I can understand that, because they need to grow a shell, otherwise they would not be able to do the job.

I can sympathise with a doctor who has made a fatal mistake, after all they are human, but what I cannot sympathise with is the cover up and deny culture of the NHS, the senior managers that will not admit wrongdoings because it will affect the ratings or their status, and the senior medics that seem to think that because they are consultants or medical directors they can do no wrong and treat damaged patients and grieving relatives with distain and arrogance because “we” do not comprehend the complexities of medicine.

The NHS has become a “no blame” institution, the attitude of the upper echelons has destroyed the prime directive of our “old lady” which is to treat patients to the best standard that can be delivered, mistakes happen, we all know that, but those mistakes must be recognised, and accepted by the people who make them and action must be taken to prevent the same thing happening again even if it means suspending or removal from the medical register of those responsible.

Remember Personal Responsibility, not “system failure” or “team errors” should be the tenet that medics live by, because we deserve better.

"As human beings, we are endowed with freedom of choice, and we cannot shuffle off our responsibility upon the shoulders of God or nature. We must shoulder it ourselves. It is our responsibility." Arnold J Toynbee


Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

OUT OF HOURS SERVICE, OUT OF TREATMENT

It seems that all I write about on this blog is bad news, and to maintain that record here is some more:-BBC NEWS Row over GP out-of-hours service

This is the story in its entirety

‘A GP out-of-hours service has been criticised over claims it told a woman, who was later found to have contracted meningitis, to ring back the next day.
Christine Saltmarsh, 73, who lives in Alconbury Western, Cambridgeshire, is now in a coma and suffered brain damage after contracting meningitis.
Her son Nicholas Wood and daughter-in-law Samantha Wood are concerned about the delay in getting treatment.
Cambridgeshire Community Services said it had started a full investigation.
Her family said Ms Saltmarsh called her GP at 1430 BST on a Sunday afternoon complaining of "earache" and was put through to the out-of-hours service.
Found unconscious
An hour later a doctor called her back.
She said she was worried she had meningitis because she had had it before but they claim she was told to call back the following day.
At 0905 BST the next morning she texted her son saying she had a headache and 24 hours later she was found unconscious.
Ms Wood said: "She rang on the Sunday and was told to wait until Monday. As far as I am concerned an emergency service is for emergencies.
"If she had got the right medication she may not have been in the bad state she is in now."
Ms Saltmarsh was taken to Hinchingbrooke Hospital in Cambridgeshire and put on a course of antibiotics.
In a statement Matthew Winn, managing director of Cambridgeshire Community Services, said: "We have launched a full investigation into the circumstances leading to Mrs Saltmarsh's admission to hospital and the response she received from the Out of Hours Doctor Service.
"Once the investigation has concluded I will meet with the family to explain the results and the actions we took on 22 March."’



But this isn’t the only one-Boy, 3, died from tonsillitis after out-of-hours GP told parents to 'wait for medication to work' Mail Online

The NHS Blog Doctor looks at from a GPs perspective.

Another dismal tale of the NHS, the out of hours service has never been acceptable, and cases like this reinforce my opinion.

“A single act does make a difference...it creates a ripple effect that can be felt many miles and people away.” Lee J Colan


Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

UNDERCOVER NURSE

There has been a lot of interest in the above, here is the video, in two parts, you can make your own mind up.

Part 1-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbG2h18UoUA&feature=related

part 2-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjxhS3tIGgc

Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

ROBBIE’S LAW

This is something I have blogged about on NHS Exposed, and here, here as well, and here


WalesOnline CAMPAIGNERS will today call for the introduction of “Robbie’s Law” to inform parents and loved ones about medical mistakes.

Action against Medical Mistakes (AvMA) wants to see a duty of candour introduced for all health professionals and managers.

This would make it a legal requirement to inform patients, or their next of kin, if there has been an error or incident in a patient’s healthcare which has, or may, cause harm.

The 10-year-old from Ystradgynlais in the Swansea Valley died in 1990 after a series of GPs and doctors failed to spot a chronic, but treatable, adrenal gland condition – Addison’s disease.

AvMA said it wants the proposed new law to be known as Robbie’s Law, in memory of Robbie and his parents efforts to learn the truth about why their son died.

The family has also been campaigning for steps to be taken to ensure injured patients or their next of kin have to be told about any errors or incidents which may cause harm.

Robbie’s case highlighted the absence of a legal duty of candour, and continues to symbolise its need, AvMA said.

Robbie’s father Will said: “Until doctors have a legal duty to tell the truth following an adverse clinical incident, the NHS complaints procedures and civil litigation will be compromised, as will patient safety.

“Robbie’s Law would ensure that the patient or relatives would know the truth about what goes wrong and lessons would be learned in the hope the same mistakes would not be repeated.

“That is all that most people affected by medical mistakes want.”

And Peter Walsh, chief executive of AvMA, said: “It is a disgrace that it is not illegal for a health professional or manager to cover up errors in healthcare in the UK.

“Other countries have made this illegal and in 2003 [Sir Liam Donaldson] the chief medical officer formally recommended such a law in his report Making Amends.

“The Government has never been able to justify ignoring this recommendation.

“The adoption of a legal duty of candour – Robbie’s Law – would send the clearest possible message that the culture of denial, which the Government accepts exists in the NHS, will not be tolerated, and will reinforce the drive to improve patient safety.”

In the latest development in the long-running case, AvMA won a legal challenge in February against a decision by the General Medical Council not to investigate Robbie’s death.

Mr Powell had asked the GMC to investigate in 2003, believing there was a “cover-up” by doctors who had allegedly falsified documents to convince others of their competence.

The GMC had told the family, in May 2008, that this would not be possible because the events surrounding Robbie’s death took place more than five years before the allegations were brought to its attention.


I would just like to wish Will Powell and his family the best of luck in their campaign.

“Be more concerned with your character than with your reputation. Your character is what you really are while your reputation is merely what others think you are.” Dale Carnegie


Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

THE DEPT OF HEALTH IS KILLING THE NHS

A couple of topics today, the first is the DH (dept of Health) is forcing a spending limit of £400 million on the NHS although there was a surplus of £1.7 Billion last year Health Service Journal

The tight restrictions on spending the surplus follow warnings that for the period after 2010 the NHS should expect its funding to grow by between just 1.5 and 2 per cent, compared with the 6.7 per cent promised by the Treasury in its comprehensive spending review for the years 2008-09 to 2010-11.

There will also be clawbacks on primary care trust allocations. Last year the Department of Health saved up to£870m by increasing the allocations by just 5.5 per cent rather than passing on the Treasury’s full 6.7 per cent.

The DH plans to do the same for next year, saving itself up to another£950m.

Hospital trusts anticipate having to reduce non-clinical staff bills by 3 per cent, either through freezing posts or redundancies.

One finance director said this would affect patient care, as the staff involved organised patient records and operating theatres and booked appointments. “Even if you slightly get that wrong and lose a patient’s notes or don’t make an appointment in time, people die,” he said.

Hospitals

Expect payment by results tariff to be based on assumption of 3.5 per cent efficiency savings year on year

Warn diminishing waiting lists mean they cannot make up income shortfalls by increasing activity

Predict cuts of up to 3 per cent of non-clinical staff bill

Will have to reduce patient length of stay and close beds

Will have to cut agency staff spending and recruit permanent staff where possible

Primary care trusts

Predict limits on surplus investment and allocations will mean tight restrictions on funds

Expect to have to make tough commissioning decisions, putting off plans for some new services

“Lord” Darzi has some explaining to do.


The second topic is:-Monitor reports 'lack of appetite' for foundation trust status a “lack of appetite” for foundation status is more of an obstacle to authorising all trusts than the recession, Monitor has said.

All trusts are meant to have applied to the regulator by the end of 2010 but 95 remain unauthorised, and 18 have not got a date for entering the process.

They face various problems including historic debt and having to plan for dramatically reduced NHS spending growth.

Chief operating officer Stephen Hay said in a statement: “Having assessed applicant trusts over five years we are now seeing our authorisation rate fall.

“In addition to the complex issues applicant trusts bring to us and the tighter financial forecast, which can make it tough to pass our assessment requirements, we are unfortunately still seeing applicants with a poor understanding of what is going on in their services, unrealistic business plans and boards who are not up to the challenges that autonomy creates.”

Take note of “tough to pass our assessment requirements” this is the same Monitor that allowed Mid Staffs to obtain foundation Trust status while hundreds of patients were dying because of lack of care and apathy.

I will ask the same question again-why do we need Foundation trusts? The only difference I can see is that the Foundation status has given rise to endless layers of pointless managers who are overpaid and underworked while patient care declines.

“Medicine, to produce health, has to examine disease.” Plutarch

Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

Angus Dei politico

NHS-THE OTHER SIDE

Undergoing MyBlogLog Verification

THIS ISN’T ABOUT HEALTH, IT IS ABOUT MONEY

BBC NEWS Alcoholics could see benefits cut Minister James Purnell has announced a review into the idea to be carried out jointly by the Department of Health and Department for Work and Pensions.

Measures that require drug addicts to get treatment in order to keep receiving benefits are currently going through Parliament.

The Conservatives said Labour had failed to "get to grips" with welfare.

Critics - including an addiction treatment charity and reformed alcoholic - say they doubt the measures will help addicts recover.

Mr Purnell said the government wanted to help people get the assistance they needed.

Speaking on a visit to Dewsbury Moor in West Yorkshire, he said: "We have introduced a new policy that will mean heroin and crack addicts get treatment in return for benefits.

"We will actually help them rather than simply handing them money which ends up in pockets of drug dealers.

Shadow work and pensions secretary Theresa May said this latest review was "another smokescreen" to "deflect from Labour's failure to get to grips with our welfare system"

She added: "Under James Purnell the system has gone into meltdown with more than 100,000 people claiming benefits because they are drug addicts or alcoholics. That's more than doubled from 48,700 since 1997.

"The government has had more than a decade to sort this problem out so this is too little, too late.

"The devil is always in the detail with Labour. Mr Purnell has failed to say when this will happen, how much it will cost and who it will exactly help."

Liberal Democrat work and pensions spokesman Steve Webb said the plans were "no more than typical New Labour posturing.”

He added: "Threatening to deprive people of their basic benefits unless they recover from alcoholism is fundamentally inhumane.

"There are far too few support services for alcoholics, and there is no evidence that people who are threatened in this way are more likely to seek help."

A spokesman for drug and alcohol treatment charity Addaction said that, historically, help for people with alcohol problems was under-funded.

"We support measures to get treatment to the people who need it, but that treatment needs proper funding to be effective," he said.

"Stopping someone's benefits could have a real impact on any children they may have. It's essential that families are taken into account when such decisions are being made."


Perhaps it is time this Government called an election, for the sake of all our health.


“When I disagree with a rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn; if I am wrong, I will; one of us will win, but both will profit.” Ayn Rand

Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

Procrastination

See http://angusdeionallandsundry.blogspot.com/

Angus

MOBILE PHONES MORE DANGEROUS THAN SMOKING

Mobile phones could kill far more people than smoking or asbestos, a study by an award-winning cancer expert has concluded. He says people should avoid using them wherever possible and that governments and the mobile phone industry must take "immediate steps" to reduce exposure to their radiation.

The study, by Dr Vini Khurana, is the most devastating indictment yet published of the health risks.

It draws on growing evidence – exclusively reported in the IoS in October – that using handsets for 10 years or more can double the risk of brain cancer.

Cancers take at least a decade to develop, invalidating official safety assurances based on earlier studies which included few, if any, people who had used the phones for that long.

Earlier this year, the French government warned against the use of mobile phones, especially by children. Germany also advises its people to minimise handset use, and the European Environment Agency has called for exposures to be reduced.

Professor Khurana – a top neurosurgeon who has received 14 awards over the past 16 years, has published more than three dozen scientific papers – reviewed more than 100 studies on the effects of mobile phones. He has put the results on a brain surgery website, and a paper based on the research is currently being peer-reviewed for publication in a scientific journal.

"It is anticipated that this danger has far broader public health ramifications than asbestos and smoking," says Professor Khurana, who told the IoS his assessment is partly based on the fact that three billion people now use the phones worldwide, three times as many as smoke. Smoking kills some five million worldwide each year, and exposure to asbestos is responsible for as many deaths in Britain as road accidents.

Late last week, the Mobile Operators Association dismissed Khurana's study as "a selective discussion of scientific literature by one individual". It believes he "does not present a balanced analysis" of the published science, and "reaches opposite conclusions to the WHO and more than 30 other independent expert scientific reviews".


Personally I don’t like using a mobile, whether this research is true-only time will tell, let’s just hope that it’s not too late for some people.

Don’t forget you saw it here first(ish)

“There is nothing which we receive with so much reluctance as advice.” Joseph Addison

Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

NOTHING SERIOUS TODAY: JUST A BIT OF GOOD NEWS

Just a snippet of news from the BBC NEWS site this morning: A spray can help men with premature ejaculation problems prolong the length of time they have sex by six times.

Bad news: it probably won’t be available for two years.

Men who used the treatment five minutes before having intercourse extended their love-making from half a minute to almost four minutes, trials showed.

The spray, developed at the Royal Victoria Hospital in Belfast, contains local anaesthetics that numb the penis.

For some 10 minutes in the sack may be enough, but for others intercourse lasting less than 20 minutes may be unsatisfactory.

In the study, the researchers looked at 300 men who regularly had difficulty lasting for more than a minute during love-making.

Most of the men had tried other treatments before, the most common being oral antidepressants.

Every time they had intercourse during the three-month study period, each couple measured the time to ejaculation with a stopwatch.

The men who tested the spray, called PSD502, were able to last 6.3 times longer on average.

In comparison, men who tested a "dummy" spray containing no drug lasted only 1.7 times longer.

PSD502 helped 90% of the men enjoy sex for up to four minutes, where they had previously only lasted for seconds.

And there was minimal transfer of the spray to the partners, meaning the men did not have to use a condom for this reason alone.

So there we are; ladies will now be able to expect four minutes of ecstasy, on average, of course there is an antidote-12 pints of lager.


“Sex is like snow; you never know how many inches you are going to get or how long it is going to last.” Murphy’s Law


Angus


Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

FLYING MAY BE BAD FOR YOUR HEALTH

Just a “normal” news item today-sky news More passengers are falling ill aboard flights as planes get bigger and stay in the air for longer, according to a report.

The rising number of casualties follows moves by airlines to make their planes more comfortable - encouraging those with pre-existing conditions to step aboard.

The findings are published in The Lancet.

They claim the number of people taken ill has increased as aircraft such as the Airbus A380 and the Boeing 777 LR extend flight times to up to 20 hours.

Dr Mark Gendreau, of the Lahey Clinic Medical Centre, Burlington, suggests that longer journeys mean passengers face "environmental and physiological changes associated with the flight.”

The Lancet highlights studies which show the risk of deep vein thrombosis increases fourfold with long haul travel.

Risk peaks when flight duration is more than eight hours and begins when journeys exceed four hours.

Interestingly, whether a passenger flies business-class or economy has no effect on incidents of DVT, experts believe.

However, DVT occurs more often in people who are sitting away from a central aisle.

The longer people stay in enclosed spaces together also increases the risk of infectious diseases such as measles and flu being spread, the research suggests.

The study's authors conclude: "Individuals need to be aware of the possible medical complications of air travel, and physicians should identify people at potential risk from air travel and advise them of any necessary treatments to travel safely."

I think we all knew that flying can be dangerous, but now it is official, or is it.



“A good holiday is one spent among people whose notions of time are vaguer than yours.” J B Priestley


Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

THE BIG OPT OUT-DO IT NOW!

From Pulse: Patients who do not initially choose to opt out of the Summary Care Record will be unable to have their records subsequently deleted, it has emerged.

The revelation comes despite contrary guidance issued by some of the first PCTs involved in the national rollout.

Information leaflets produced in a number of areas including South West Essex, Stoke-on-Trent, South Birmingham and Lincolnshire advise patients they will be able to change their mind about having a Summary Care Record ‘at any time’.

But in a response to a Freedom of Information request, the Department of Health confirmed that once created, Summary Care Records cannot be deleted, although they can be ‘masked’ at a patient’s request to prevent use by clinical staff.

The Department said ‘the medico-legal evidential significance of the SCR will be extremely important’ and warned ‘the cost of completely removing them would be prohibitive.’

By Steve Nowottny

So do it now-The Big Opt Out » Write to your GP here is the form to use, all you have to do is fill it in, print it out, sign it and send it to your GP.


"One's mind has a way of making itself up in the background, and it suddenly becomes clear what one means to do." A C Benson


Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

SOMETHING TO LOOK FORWARD TO

An ageing workforce and higher rates of illness and disease among employees will pose a serious threat to British business by 2030, a report warns.

Private healthcare company BUPA estimates the number of workers with chronic conditions will rise by at least 7% to more than four million.

Rates of mental illness and serious diseases, such as heart problems, will also soar.
BUPA warns the problem will damage all companies' long-term productivity.

BBC NEWS The report, published in partnership with The Work Foundation, The Oxford Health Alliance and RAND Europe, brings together more than 200 pieces of research to provide an insight into how the health of British workers will change over the next 20 years.

The study estimates that the average age of the workforce will reach 43, while 68 will become the average age of retirement by 2050.
The increasing age of the workforce will be one factor fuelling rates of ill health.

This followed a review by Dame Carol Black, in 2008, which found ill-health in the working-age population is already costing Britain over £100bn a year.

Early warning

Dr Natalie-Jane Macdonald, of BUPA UK Health Insurance, said: "For the first time, we have a clear picture of the major health issues that will affect British workers over the next 20 years.

"Our report provides British businesses with an early warning of how the health needs of workers will change and, importantly, it gives them time to take action to keep their employees healthy, productive and at work.”

Take note of the last paragraph-“time to take action to keep their employees healthy, productive and at work.” What about the sick, the disabled and the mentally ill now:
And those that do not have jobs or cannot work, where will they be in 20 years time?

Still on the scrapheap probably.


"Men for the sake of getting a living forget to live." Margaret Fuller


Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

GOOD, BAD OR INACCURATE?

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has commended NHS progress on infection control the link is here

To carry out the assessment, it asked that trusts declare whether they were compliant with the regulations and cross-checked this with other performance information, including patient and staff surveys, findings from the Healthcare Commission's hygiene inspections, trusts' declarations against core standards for infection control, and rates of MRSA and Clostridium difficile infection

And that is the problem, self declaration, the same system that allowed Mid Staffs Hospital to attain trust status, which was Monitor’s responsibility Monitor picks chief executive for Mid Staffordshire and apparently failed miserably to pick up any problems as did the now deceased Healthcare Commission.

The CQC then came up with a list of 21 Trusts that are subject to conditions, which are legally enforceable and must be met within agreed timescales or enforcement action will follow

Ten acute trusts, six primary care trusts, four mental health care trusts and one ambulance trust were registered with conditions. Four of these are foundation trusts. Some conditions are ongoing, such as keeping wards clean, while others have a deadline for taking action (ranging from one to eight months).

This is the link for the list-HCAI registration status of NHS trusts that provide healthcare directly to patients (XLS, 205KB, opens in new window) take a look at your local hospital.

I see that the Royal Surrey is included in the “conditions” list, I know the Royal Surrey quite well and am surprised at this entry, but is it in the list because it is underperforming or because it is Honest?

That is the problem I have with the NHS now, I don’t trust the “trusts” to be honest, all I see is spin and stats, along with how wonderful everything is from Darzi.

The medical bloggers don’t seem very happy either, too much admin, too little resources, and too little time.

The NHS is not what it should be, the pointy heads at the Dept of Health have tried to introduce too many bad policies too quickly, GPs are suffering junior doctors are suffering, nurses are suffering and worst of all patients are suffering.

The NHS is now too complicated, the pointy heads need to think again and return to the tenet of the “customer is king” hospitals should concentrate on treating patients, not reaching targets.

Why do we need “Foundation Trusts”? what is the problem with just having hospitals where the management is there to ensure that the front line workers have the staff and resources to treat patients?

Let’s be a little retro with the NHS and return to the days when you came out of hospital fitter than when you went in (in most cases), when consultants actually spoke to the patients, and doctors had continuity of care of their patients, when nurses could actually nurse and didn’t spend 75 percnt of their time filling forms or begging the management for more staff.


Let’s make the NHS simpler, and allow it to do it’s job-treating the people that need it, let’s lose three or four layers of management so that the medics can concentrate on the patients and the management can take the back seat where they belong.

Let’s.

“Managers construct, rearrange, single out, and demolish many 'objective' features of their surroundings. When people act they unrandomize variables, insert vestiges of orderliness, and literally create their own constraints.” Karl Weick

Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

'We will be putting patients first'

Not my words, but those of Cynthia Bower who was in charge of the health authority that oversaw Stafford Hospital between 2008 to 2008.

BBC NEWS It may only be her first day in office, but already Cynthia Bower has found herself under attack from all sides.

Her appointment as head of England's new health super regulator, the Care Quality Commission, was questioned by the Tories last month.

And, as she formally takes up the reins, she finds her role being branded an "April fools joke" by patients.

The watchdog said patients had needlessly died because of the poor care and criticised the failure of local health organisations to spot and tackle the problems.

Ms Bower says she was notified of concerns over high death rates in April 2007 and launched an investigation immediately.

This involved bringing together managers from the trust and four others where concerns had been highlighted as well as senior people from within the health authority.

With the help of Birmingham University experts they analysed data and case notes, but eventually concluded over a year later that there were no systematic problems.

"The Healthcare Commission has access to information and resources that we as the health authority just didn't.

"They had patients coming to them with complaints. We didn't. They have much more resources to analyse the data they collected.

"We are all indebted to them for the job they have done."

Ms Bower believes she has learnt from the experience and it has made it clear that if concerns are raised you have to "act as early as possible" and "share information".

"It is important we make quality of care a priority and that is what I will do as regulator. We will be tough and we will put patients first."

And it is this emphasis on the patient that she believes is going to define the future of health in the 21st century.


Despite the negativity which has surrounded her appointment, it seems clear Ms Bower aims to hit the ground running.


Yes and the further the better!

"When they discover the centre of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to discover they are not it." Bernard Bailey

Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

THEY TALK THE TALK, BUT CAN THEY WALK THE WALK?

The Care Quality Commission came on line yesterday, another “institution” the National Quality Board, part of “Lord” Darzi’s “Next Stage Review of the NHS, High Quality Care for All” Landmark day as patients to help put quality at the heart of the NHS and social care : Department of Health - News is part of the “new NHS”.

Patient feedback on operations and the start of the new NHS and Social care complaints system are two of the measures that will come into force today, marking a major milestone, that will ensure quality of patient care is at the centre of everything the NHS does, the Department of Health announced.

A number of measures, all designed to raise the quality of services and standards in the NHS in England come into effect from 1 April. The measures include:

A new, simpler complaints system - which will encourage a culture that seeks and then acts on patient feedback to make services more effective, personal and safe. The new system will also make the NHS more accountable.

The Performance Framework - will set minimum standards of quality, safety and financial management that patients can expect from the NHS and tackle underperformance in hospitals and primary care trusts. The framework will identify trusts, remove poor managers and bring in new management, including from other hospitals or from the private sector.

That last part is the important sentence, now is the time to walk the walk, or will it be the usual confused, cover-ups, old boys club we have seen for the last five years since “Foundation Trusts” the elite of the NHS that is killing patients by hospital CEOs ignoring patient treatment in favour of targets and financial freedom was introduced.

And “a new simpler complaints system” that will just bounce complaints from the trusts to the Health Ombudsman and back again.


Well “Lord” Ara Darzi. Can you walk the walk or is it all going to be a “two left feet” job?


Just a foot note, the GMC made 30 visits to this blog yesterday after “Google-ing” “piss poor”, maybe they have finally got the hint. Angus Dei on all and sundry: MY MATES AT THE GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL


“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.” Sir Winston Churchill

Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

NHS Behind the headlines

Angus Dei politico

sorry no post today

My internet connection is behaving like an MP today, useful for about ten seconds then useless for four hours.

Hopefully all will be back to normal tommorrow, but I managed to post on All and sundry before it died:)


Angus