Here is a new and important report providing evidence that despite the increased spending on the National Health Service, it still provides substandard care.
A report by the spending watchdog concluded that Britain has one of the worst records in Europe for ensuring dementia sufferers receive the best drugs available.It likened the situation to 1950s cancer care when GPs did not tell patients of their diagnosis because they did not want to distress them and because they believed nothing could be done to help them.
In 2004, the UK was in the bottom third of European countries in terms of the proportion of patients receiving antidementia drugs.
Only 18 per cent of British dementia patients received drugs to alleviate their condition - compared with 50 per cent in France and 46 per cent in Ireland. Only Poland, Bulgaria, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic and Slovakia fared worse.
Care for the elderly has been one of the services that has been allowed to fall behind international standards while the NHS has concentrated its attention on the more politically sensitive issue of waiting lists. There is not enough money for everything in the NHS because the huge amount of waste and inefficiency (please see the book for more on this) uses up a large part of the budget.
The story is from the Daily Mail, citing a report from the National Audit Office. It has a league table which is particularly telling. I assume it comes from the National Audit Office report.
Posted by James Bartholomew • Indexed in NHS
Comments (5)
TrackBack (0)
Comments
Sorry, should have added this link -good discussion of the film here:
http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2007/06/michael_moores_sicko_or_why_or.php
Posted by: Susan at July 5, 2007 09:36 AM
Susan
Do you think that America's is the only alternative model for healthcare?
Posted by: Bishop Hill at July 5, 2007 12:27 PM
Susan,
None of us doubt that the US system has huge flaws, not least of which is the way costs are inflated thanks to poor incentives and vested and protected producer interests. I wouldn't want what the the US has.
However, this doesn't mean that the NHS is better. It also suffers from vested interests and poor incentives in different ways and it also rations care. Outcomes for most major diseases are worse than in almost every advanced country.
There are other alternatives which work better than the US and the UK systems. It is no coincidence that both these systems have inflated medical salaries well above those in other countries - they are both producer-dominated so that care is either too expensive for some or is rationed for others.
Posted by: HJHJ at July 5, 2007 03:06 PM
Bishop, no, I don't think that the USA is the only alternative model and I'm sure the NHS is very flawed. I must read 'the book' - it's in the pile on my bedside table ;-)
I think that any healthcare system has got to have a failsafe policy for the lowest in society -there will always be people who, for one reason or another, can't afford or are unable to arrange thir own healthcare, and I want to know that they will be looked after properly. That plainly does not happen in America.
Posted by: Susan at July 8, 2007 08:46 PM
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/2007/07/britain_well_do.php on line 316
Warning: implode() [function.implode]: Bad arguments. in /home/bartholo/public_html/archives/2007/07/britain_well_do.php on line 316
James, have you watched Michael Moore's film about health care in America, 'Sicko', yet? There's no way I would swap our very imperfect NHS for what they have in the USA.
Posted by: Susan at July 5, 2007 09:21 AM