NHS Woes

Soldato
Joined
12 Sep 2012
Posts
11,696
Location
Surrey
I think his point was that there can never be a surplus. Give them a budget and they will spend 110% of it with most of it going towards helping people. Granted there are ways to cut costs or allocate the money better but it is the kind of thing that will always spend as much as you throw at it.
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Posts
9,315
That's only because it HAS to be that way. If the money's there, it'll be spent.

Spent treating patients. Not many people know that one of the reasons that hospitals run out of budget it because they spend that money by treating as many people as fast as they can. They don't turn people away when they've spent their budget. They can hardly tell the woman in childbirth or the person with the broken leg or aortic aneurysm to come back next month when their budget is refreshed.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
6,752
I think his point was that there can never be a surplus. Give them a budget and they will spend 110% of it with most of it going towards helping people. Granted there are ways to cut costs or allocate the money better but it is the kind of thing that will always spend as much as you throw at it.
we aren't there though are we? We're not in a position of surplus. We're lagging behind and people are suffering for it. Should people die because of fears a beancounter will spend all their budget on printer ink in order to keep their fund allocation?

B@
 
Permabanned
Joined
25 Jan 2013
Posts
4,277
I think his point was that there can never be a surplus. Give them a budget and they will spend 110% of it with most of it going towards helping people. Granted there are ways to cut costs or allocate the money better but it is the kind of thing that will always spend as much as you throw at it.

Precisely. It's just the nature of the beast. The spending in our department is stupidly erratic because you can't predict when the influx of patients is likely to happen and for how long it may remain.
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Sep 2012
Posts
11,696
Location
Surrey
I think you misinterpreted DrToffners original point, which is essentially 'it can always do with the cash, give it more and it will spend more to help people'. That you were arguing with a viewpoint that was never expressed.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
2 Apr 2006
Posts
3,700
So it was a Saturday night? To wait that long is hardly surprising for something deemed non-urgent.

I know this is subjective but a 73 year old falling down stairs and sustaining a cut to the head that's bleeding quite heavily, seems pretty urgent to me. I guess you'd have to be in a similar situation with a family member to appreciate the level of anxiety we felt.
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Nov 2009
Posts
4,784
Location
Edinburgh
I have had horrendous experiences during cancer treatment from my local health board up here in Edinburgh. Not enough frontline staff and far to many well paid and obscurely titled management posts couple with ridiculous targets applied to complex, multi-dimensional issues in hospital care imposed by politicians of all parties. Not forgetting the phenomenal money wasting because of weird buying procedures imposed on the NHS trusts.

The NHS is broken yet no party has the guts to make the radical decisions that the service needs.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Feb 2009
Posts
4,978
Location
South Wirral
On budgets I'm sure the NHS suffers from something common to big companies. NEVER EVER spend below your budget - you will be punished for efficiency by having the next years' reduced by twice the amount "you didn't need".

As already pointed out the UK spends less per head than most first world countries and costs are only increasing with an aging population and more expensive treatments. Until we're prepared to pay more tax to fund it, the OP's story and those like it will be commonplace.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
29 Mar 2003
Posts
56,808
Location
Stoke on Trent
I wish I'd taken a picture when I came out of work tonight and passed our A&E.
I stopped cycling and counted 26 Ambulances parked all over the place with an Air Ambulance also parked on it's H.
None of them will be able to move until their patients are triaged.

Our A&E is only equipped to deal with 250 patients but sees over 400.
We set up a new department called Ambulatory Emergency Care to deal with 30 patients and that deals with over 120.

We then have 250 patients a day Ready For Discharge but the beds are still taken up because nobody will fetch them until the weekend and we need to admit 150 patients a day into beds - the math doesn't add up and winter is coming (Dragons will sort it out).

Last December my 81 year old Mum on 24/7 oxygen spent 23 & 3/4 hours on a trolley in an A&E corridor.
She was then admitted to AMU where she changed beds 6 times in 24 hours.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Oct 2011
Posts
21,592
Location
ST4
Last week I wanted some antibiotics (part of my eczema had gotten infected again) and phoned the GP's surgery at 16:00 to get a prescription for them. Couldn't get them straight away as they're antibiotics and would need to see the Doc. first. So said fine, book me in. Receptionists said "17:10 tonight OK?" Saw the Doc. and had a prescription for my Flucloxacillin sorted out. Then by the time I'd walked down the hill from the Doc's my prescription had already been filled at the Chemist.

So in the space of an hour, I'd phoned up for some tablets, been to see the Doc. and gotten my prescription filled. Conna complain about service like that.

And that's not even mentioning the absolutely life-changing treatment I've received over the past year from the consultants and staff at dermatology dept. at the Royal Stoke.
 
Associate
Joined
27 Sep 2012
Posts
157
As i have said on here before when NHS threads have come up.

The single biggest problem with it is not finance or lack of staff {although they dont help} the biggest problem with it is the great British public..

We have a whole generation now that thinks everything in the NHS is free, even politicians and others that should know better refer to it as the ''free'' health service.

That leads to everyone and there granny now thinking it is ok to call an ambulance when barry the budgie gets a cough, or they want a lift home from the pub on a saturday night because they are too drunk to walk.

You see it on some of them 999 programs that are all over the Tv lately.

Saw one with a guy been drinking all day and he fell down the stairs, his missus called an ambulance they arrived and said yea you could have internal injuries etc best get you to the hospital. he refused to go. now because they were there in his house and in there opinion may have injuries that need hospital treatment they couldnt just leave when he refused to go. they had to stay. they now had a duty of care to stay with him.

They were in his house trying to get him to come with them for more than 5 HOURS.!! even calling the police didnt help

If the OP wants to know where the ambulance is when it isnt getting his mother in law to hospital.. well its at that drunks house more than likely.

And you see it over and over again, the solution to it is not to just throw more money at it it needs an attitude change.
 
Associate
Joined
22 Sep 2007
Posts
2,179
Location
Abingdon
On budgets I'm sure the NHS suffers from something common to big companies. NEVER EVER spend below your budget - you will be punished for efficiency by having the next years' reduced by twice the amount "you didn't need".

As already pointed out the UK spends less per head than most first world countries and costs are only increasing with an aging population and more expensive treatments. Until we're prepared to pay more tax to fund it, the OP's story and those like it will be commonplace.

We also need to pay more tax to fund university education, social housing, protecting the disabled and fund a decent level of retirement for old people.

If you could send all your money and future earnings to HMRC, thanks.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Apr 2011
Posts
3,119
NHS services in the north east which both my partner and I have experienced in the last 24 months or so have been totally spot on.

Very efficient, excellent service. No sign of issues. I am sure they have had to make efficiency savings - That's a good thing, as long as it doesn't compromise the service.

Shame the same can't be said for the county council, which is still a cesspit of wasted spending.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
20,999
Location
Just to the left of my PC
As i have said on here before when NHS threads have come up.

The single biggest problem with it is not finance or lack of staff {although they dont help} the biggest problem with it is the great British public..

We have a whole generation now that thinks everything in the NHS is free, even politicians and others that should know better refer to it as the ''free'' health service.

That leads to everyone and there granny now thinking it is ok to call an ambulance when barry the budgie gets a cough, or they want a lift home from the pub on a saturday night because they are too drunk to walk.

You see it on some of them 999 programs that are all over the Tv lately.

Saw one with a guy been drinking all day and he fell down the stairs, his missus called an ambulance they arrived and said yea you could have internal injuries etc best get you to the hospital. he refused to go. now because they were there in his house and in there opinion may have injuries that need hospital treatment they couldnt just leave when he refused to go. they had to stay. they now had a duty of care to stay with him.

They were in his house trying to get him to come with them for more than 5 HOURS.!! even calling the police didnt help

If the OP wants to know where the ambulance is when it isnt getting his mother in law to hospital.. well its at that drunks house more than likely.

And you see it over and over again, the solution to it is not to just throw more money at it it needs an attitude change.

That's part of the problem but is there any evidence of how much of the problem it is? It gets a lot of media coverage, but that doesn't mean it's all or even most of the problem or even a significant proportion of the problem. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't.

There are other problems mentioned - inefficient management, inefficiency imposed by politically motivated target systems, inefficiency imposed by the common foolishness of punishing departments for being under budget within an arbitrarily declared time period, inefficiency imposed by purchasing rules, etc.

A couple of minor examples of the last one from the company I work for:

A plumber was needed for a small job at a site. A local plumber of known reliability who had been subcontracted to do work at that site previously was available right away. Not allowed. The only allowed method was to phone an intermediary company who would subcontract that plumber for the job and charge double what he would have charged. Same job. Same person doing the job. Double the price.

A vacuum cleaner was required. Standard item, sold all over the place. Including from a chain of shops, one of which was about 100 metres from the site that needed it. Not allowed. The only allowed method was to pay another company to buy it from that shop and sell it to us at a significantly higher price and with a delivery time of 2 days rather than about 2 minutes to walk over the road and buy it. Same item, bought from the same shop. Higher price, far more delay.

This sort of thing happens all the time at all sorts of scale.

Another thing that increases costs is cutting costs. That might sound silly, but it's not silly to anyone who understands a job. Which rules out far too many people who are at a decision-making level. Cutting costs is usually done inefficiently and/or excessively and results in decreased efficiency and lack of maintainance, which increases costs. It's analogous to replacing a car in good condition with a car that's close to scrap. It's cheaper, so you've "cut costs". At the cost of repeated repairs which soon add up to more than the cost you "saved" while leaving you with using an inferior car.

I think a large part of the problem is lack of objective information because the whole issue of the NHS is so politicised.
 
Associate
Joined
15 Jan 2009
Posts
1,056
Location
On the wagon
I work in pre hospital care and I don't think its a simple as some here are making it out to be.

We need significantly more resources than we currently have to manage the workload we are being asked to manage, but its not as simple as simply giving us more ambulances, we need more A&E availibily (which in turns means a requirement for more speciality beds), more GP appointments, better out of hour non emergency care provision, lower waiting times for outpatient treatment. All of which would prevent chronic or non emergency conditions becoming acute. And most importantly a much better mental health provision, perhaps with associated improvements in social welfare to reduce mental health problems.

We need better education to reduce well meaning but inappropriate 999 calls/a&e attendances, we need to somehow put an end to the belief that we live in a society where your be sued if you don't call 999 at the slightest hint of an accident you witnessed when acting in some kind of formal capacity. We need society to take back control of their own health, and to be responsible for those around them.

The thing is that these things are incredibly complicated, more money would help, butt lets not assume its that simple, and lets not just throw it at the headline grabbing bits of our NHS. For example, bed blocking could be much eased if we invested in patient transport and made social care easier to arrange.

I think crucially the NHS needs to be honest about what it can and can't do, and let the public decide it that's acceptable or not. If you're happy with what you're getting then vote to keep it, if you want better, vote for someone who is telling you that we'll need to pay for it, and we'll need to commit to change. We can't keep having more for the same money though, nor can we have the same for less money.
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Jul 2003
Posts
14,494
NHS in England is very different to that of other areas of the UK, I honestly think the English model is needlessly bloated with CCGs/Trusts but has some good things but less working truly nationally.
 
Back
Top Bottom