Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

Just been watching this live debate on BBC Parliament. Jeremy Hunt has been very impressive as compared to Andy Burnham I must say. I've heard him on the radio quite a lot and I like his style.

He made a very good point that, having created such a fuss about this issue, the Labour benches are virtually empty and they seem to have very few actual questions to raise about what they're claiming is virtual meltdown. If anything, from what I've seen/heard this morning, this was a Labour own goal.

There's a brief summary here (starts at 10.30) but it doesn't fully reflect the paucity of Burnham's attempt to embarrass the Government on a subject on which they like to feel they are trusted by the public.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-30522160

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

Didn't see the debate but I suspect you aren't very neutral Osem going from your 'sig', so will take your political report with a pinch of salt. It's certainly an 'own goal' for Jeremy Hunt when this story leaked this week.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...r-reveals.html .

I really hope he doesn't have a cardiac arrest and needs an ambulance in a hurry (or do i?) Well done to whoever leaked it; doubtless it was hoped to be buried in Christmas week.

Extending ambulance times is not only playing games with peoples lives, but is a cynical attempt to get A&E numbers down aswell - i.e. hoping more die before they get to hospital.

The NHS will lose the Tories the next election. People are seeing through their strategy of running it into the ground, then claiming only their private sector mates can help. Labour have been increasing their lead in the polls this week, I suspect this story may have had an effect.

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

Wales' Labour run Welsh Ambulance service hasn't hit its response targets for over a year. That's all the proof I need to tell me who knows best.

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

It is the ambulance service and even A&E doctors suggesting the changes. One of the claims is that MORE ambulances could be provided rather than the single driver cars who cannot transport anybody.

A recent personal experience of mine was that I called an ambulance and after they stabilised my situation and took me to hospital, the crew had to wait around for about 45 minutes before I was admitted to A&E. Once in A&E I was left alone for periods of time whilst various doctors and nurses came and went, performing various examinations and tests. Therefore the ambulance crew didn't need to be with me during that 45 minutes. They could have been dealing with others. Address that issue and you increase capacity very quickly.

I spent 4 weeks in hospital, so I did need to make the call.

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

The current situation is a joke anyway.

A lady fell a few streets away from us, and badly hurt herself possibly broke something so she couldn't be moved as advised by the 999 operator, happened late on a Friday night was 11pm in the evening. The Ambulance finally turned up at 3.05am some 4 hours later.

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

The response time here in Neath\Swansea is meant to be 6 minutes from call to ambulance getting there.

I was chatting to a friend of mine who is a Paramedic and another guy who is a Coast Guard in the Gower in Swansea and they were saying that the responce times are unrealistic.

The Coast Guard was saying he rang for an ambulace in the summer after a lady passed out on the beach and hit her head on rocks cutting it. The Air ambulance was unavailable and they dispatched an Ambulance from the Main hospital in Swansea which is the other side of Swansea which was meant to get there in 6 mins. I know they have a siran and traffic give way but its impossible in 6 mins. Under normal circumstances by car u r talking a 45 min drive.

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

One of the girls at work passed out last week and it looked pretty serious. We called an ambulance and it took 2 hours to arrive.

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

I think they average out the long journeys in the countryside against the short trips in the towns and cities, so anywhere with a large rural area is always going to produce a slow overall response time.

Plus roads are getting more snarled up every day, often with no way traffic can get out of the way in the logjams planners have developed through idiocy (or anti-car sentiment).

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

People getting plastered on a weekend and ambulances attending left right and centre, it's no wonder the service is stretched. A rapidly growing population demanding more treatment means either we spend more money on more staff/ambulances or try to do something about the level of demand and its root causes.

Just been listening to a paramedic who wasted several hours dealing with a guy who claimed he'd been having severe breathing problems which turned out to be due to excessive nasal hair. The paramedic cancelled the ambulance but the guy insisted that one be despatched and so it was apparently. Just one of oh so many cases in which the ambulance service is abused.

Although I don't agree with paying for GP visits etc. perhaps such abuse is an inevitable consequence of a service which is free at the point of delivery. :shrug:

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

In the centre of Newport though....

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

Cardiff centre is almost a no-go area for cars these days, and it'll get worse for TWO YEARS when they move the bus station after demolishing Marland House and the car park behind, plus build the new BBC HQ on the old bus station site. The disruption caused by the building of the Saint Davids Centre was bad enough...

Time to reopen Cardiff Royal Infirmary as an second ER for the city I think!

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-30705689

Let's hope more of them turn up than bothered for the emergency debate they demanded... :rolleyes:

Labour had 13 years in power with a decent parliamentary majority and Brown's world changing 'boom' to fix the NHS and blew it by fixating on PFI and giving GPs an overly generous contract which, alongside mass immigration/population growth in certain areas, has put massive strain on the A&E depts. They also presided over the Staffs hospitals scandal in which hundreds died through abject neglect but seem very keen NOT to mention that for some strange reason. I wonder why... :rolleyes:

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

More bad news tonight in relation to A&E performance.

"The leaders of Britain’s doctors and nurses said A&E units’ increasing struggle to cope with ever-rising numbers of patients were the result of problems elsewhere, such as failings with the NHS 111 telephone advice service, staff recruitment problems and the lack of social care services to help older people stay as well as possible in their own homes.

The Cardigan.

It's getting as bad here in Northern Ireland.

"Belfast Health Trust has cancelled all non-urgent elective surgery up to and including 10 January due to pressures on emergency departments. The rest of Northern Ireland's five trusts have cancelled some non-urgent elective surgeries.


CBB

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

Yet they managed to meet a 98% target in England for A&E depts to see patients within 4 hours most of the time. Since the Tories took over they set the target to 95% and promptly made that target look optimistic.

It has been nearly 5 years since the Tories have taken over yet things have got progressively worse. How long can you get by blaming the previous lot when the Tories have shown themselves to be less than competent?

LAB may have made a lot of mistakes in their tenure but they cared a significant amount more about the NHS than the Tories do. They simply do not care a jot about it and would rather be shot of it and would do if it wasn't political suicide.

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

I think it's really strange that it's happening everywhere. all of a sudden.
it's as if there's a conspiracy.

to show that Dave has destroyed this country.
or an excuse for Dave to say we'll have to do our favourite thing and privatise it.

and then the media say it's our fault. we're going in for broken bones and such. not a life and death situation.

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

That's still the middle of nowhere though isn't it?

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

I might just be missing something but how many new, not replacement, hospitals have opened in the last 10 years?

And what's been the increase in the UK population over that time?

I can only think of A&E units being merged or downgraded in the West of Scotland and would be interested to find out if this was happening elsewhere or are services increasing.

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

And with up to a third of attendees at A&E being 'non-urgent' cases (neither Accident or Emergency), it's just going to get worse...

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

How much of this issue is down to a lack of recources and how much is simply bad management

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

Some expert opinions on that.

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

On the A&E situation the reason they are so busy is misuse by joe public. Many people do not need to attend. GP surgeries need to look at putting on more GP sessions and the majority of people can be seen there or with a walk in/minor injuries unit.

The ambulance service is stretched and needs serious funding that is the biggest problem with that there are just not the crews needed.

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

Blaming the Tories for what they've done/haven't done is one thing but letting Labour claim that it's nothing to do with them is quite another. In spite of all the money they chucked around (including the massively expensive PFI contracts they've tied the taxpayer too) things were not significantly better when they were running the show during their supposed 'boom' years. All was not rosy in A&E in 2010 and that was after 13 years of supposed Labour TLC and a parliamentary majority which enabled them to do as they wish. What a crock! Contrast that with the situation HMG - an unhappy coalition - inherited and then tell me that they were ever going to be able to reverse the situation, especially given Labour's renegotiation of the GP's contract which has led to so many people not being able to get appointments.

What Labour 'care' about is very different from what they actually 'deliver' IMHO and they weren't part of a coalition struggling with a massive deficit and pathetic notes telling them all the money had been spent FGS. More Labour 'care' eh?
They really care about social engineering and creating a dependant society. Chucking money at the NHS doesn't mean they care about it - IMHO it means they care about the votes their supposed 'care' generates. They introduced plenty of private enterprise into the NHS all on their own without any help from evil NHS hating Tories or did you miss that bit? Private involvement which we will be paying for for decades. In Staffs, they presided over just about the single worst example of institutionalised abuse you could wish to imagine with hundreds of deaths due to negligence and neglect. Odd how we don't hear them talk much about that now eh? Too busy hoping we've all forgotten about that scandal and banging on about A&E in winter. How's about that for Labour 'care' eh?

If we contrast the 13 years they had and wasted with the 5 years HMG has had, it's perfectly clear who's had the harder job and in the worst of economic environments. If Labour had carried on where they left off the NHS would have collapsed. As for your 'targets', during their period in power, we used to get all sorts of hospital appointments which, when we turned up were nothing more that box ticking exercises, nothing new, no treatment, no nothing - a total waste of time for all concerned but a nice shiny star on the target chart showing how much they 'cared' about us. More people seen more often!! Great eh??!! Real success in terms of outcomes... :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 08:58 ---------- Previous post was at 08:51 ----------

That's where a lot of the problems lie IMHO. You only have to look at what the various exposes of the NHS over the years demonstrated to see how inefficient so much of it is. Albeit not connected with sexy 'A&E', James Martin's documentary about hospital food revealed massive waste, outdated methods and inept management which was frankly scandalous. Small beer you could argue except that we've seen it repeated in procurement, IT etc. involving vast sums of money which could have been spent on what really matters - treating people.

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

Sorry Dave. you've had 5 years. and all we've heard is you banging on about the old residents.
now you're telling us that if we give you another 5 years you'll do what you haven't managed to do in the last 5 already.

sorry. enough is enough.
the NHS is obviously not safe on your watch.
and the rumour is. your plan was to destroy it anyway.

start packing.

Re: Emergency A&E/Ambulance service debate
 

---------- Post added at 09:42 ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 ----------

From what I've read/heard, including from Ambulance Service staff, many of the problems come not from a shortage of ambulances and personnel but those resources being held up in A&E depts. because they can't offload their patients and move onto the next call. Something needs to be done to take the pressure off A&E, and filter out those who don't really need to be there. Our local A&E screens people so that the more serious cases stay in A&E whilst others are directed to on site nurses and GPs. It works well but I have no idea how widespread that system is - it seems like common sense to me.

Another part of the problem is bed blocking by older people who in many cases cannot be discharged because there are no other services available to them at the time. Some, maybe a lot, of that will be down to cuts in community based services but there's no doubt in my mind that some is down to those elderly people being intentionally 'invisible' to the system.

I have personal experience of several elderly people who refuse to seek help at home. They don't want strangers coming into their homes and will do almost anything to avoid it, including lying to medical staff about their situation. They refuse to ask for/accept outside help, choosing instead to rely on A&E on an ad-hoc basis. They are not in the 'system' and if the worst happens and they can't cope, it'll be a trip to A&E and a hospital bed blocked because nothing else has been put in place for them. I dare say there are a great many such people who're in the same situation but nobody can force them to accept help.