This excerpt from the Daily Telegraph story on the state of the NHS today tells us something fundamental about why the NHS will always provide an inferior service to other countries with systems that have a large proportion of private or charitable hospitals:
A study published yesterday based on figures from strategic health authorities showed a predicted deficit of £341 million at the end of this month. Yet again the deficits will be shuffled across into next year's accounts, storing up trouble for the future.Attempts to reduce them have a direct impact on patient care. Wards are closed, non-urgent operations are put on hold, money is not spent on improving services like extra intensive care beds and the staff to man them, which would have avoided the seven cancellations of Mrs Dixon's operation.
It is simple really: if an NHS hospital does an operation, it costs the hospital money. But if a private or charitable hospital does an operation, that (usually) brings in money. All institutions need money. Under one system, the pressure leads to fewer operations. Under the other system, it leads to more. Where are you more likely to get more operations and less waiting?
Also in the story:
This year, 2004-05, nearly £64.5billion will have been spent by the Government on health services.
In 1996-97, £33 billion was spent. An accompanying chart says that this is an increase of 53 per cent after allowing for inflation.
What has been the increase in 'finished consultant episodes' per annum? Only 10 per cent. It does look, on the face of it, as though productivity has gone down.
The waiting times for operations and for diagnosis are shown. Most of the operation waiting times are shorter. Most of the waiting times for diagnosis are longer. It is noticeable that one of the best reductions in waiting times is for a relatively minor operation - cataracts. The waiting time for the major procedure of hip replacement, in contrast, is up from 198 days to 217 days. After all that money spent, it is not much of a return.
Professor John Appleby, the chief economist of the King's Fund, said that productivity in some areas was going down, "But the measurements used are deeply flawed. Essentially we do not have a good measure."
Perhaps that is one reason why the problems of Margaret Dixon - who says her life-threatening operation has been cancelled seven times (so she has said her goodbyes to her family seven times - a ghastly experience) - has grabbed the headlines. When the statistics may not be reliably meaningful, anecdotes become powerful.
The appalling proposal of NICE to stop new patients from getting the Alzheimer's disease drug, Aricept, is, fortunately, getting plenty of coverage. With an election coming up, I expect the Government to announce to that it will not accept NICE's recommendation on this. There are too many people with access to the media who know that Aricept is genuinely beneficial. If the NHS does not provide Aricept, these people (whatever their previous views) will know that the NHS is a very long way from offering first rate health service. They will know that the extra money has not worked.
The full Daily Telegraph story is here.
Posted by James Bartholomew • Indexed in NHS
Comments (0)
TrackBack (14)
Warning: file(http://63.247.138.2/~bartholo/randomquotes.dump) [function.file]: failed to open stream: No route to host in /home/bartholo/public_html/archives/2005/03/basic_hospital.php on line 287
Warning: implode() [function.implode]: Invalid arguments passed in /home/bartholo/public_html/archives/2005/03/basic_hospital.php on line 287

