Spam & Scams5 mins ago
Dont Panic, Dont Panic !!!!!!!!!!!
56 Answers
don't panic, via bbc news the 14 hospitals which have been investigated for poor quality services ( including high death rates ) are to have managers put in place to manage and oversee the managers. problem solved, .......ed sorry about the capitals but im so angry, :(
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anneasquith. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Sorry, missed a bit from that last paragraph...
"Pound for Pound, the NHS achieves broadly the same performance of health outcomes, as measured by the standard indicators, for around half the price."
Should read
"Pound for Pound, the NHS achieves broadly the same performance of health outcomes, as measured by the standard indicators, for around half the cost of the US healthcare system"...
"Pound for Pound, the NHS achieves broadly the same performance of health outcomes, as measured by the standard indicators, for around half the price."
Should read
"Pound for Pound, the NHS achieves broadly the same performance of health outcomes, as measured by the standard indicators, for around half the cost of the US healthcare system"...
Lazygun this is the link that slaney gave........have a quick look.
http://
What is: Quality care? How is it measured?
Safe Care ? How and by whom is it measured?
Coordinated care....whatever that means.
Patient Centred Care....so what are the above all about?
Cost related....I can guess.
Timeliness of care
Eficiency
and so on. All difficult to define and open to interpretation by different individuals (whoever they are)
Now the numbers:
What is the difference between a one and a two...a two and a three.....just a matter of opinion........guesswork?
To me most of that is pure conjecture and guesswork.
http://
What is: Quality care? How is it measured?
Safe Care ? How and by whom is it measured?
Coordinated care....whatever that means.
Patient Centred Care....so what are the above all about?
Cost related....I can guess.
Timeliness of care
Eficiency
and so on. All difficult to define and open to interpretation by different individuals (whoever they are)
Now the numbers:
What is the difference between a one and a two...a two and a three.....just a matter of opinion........guesswork?
To me most of that is pure conjecture and guesswork.
all the while NHS managers are controlling massive budgets, yet people are dying, for want of decent care, how can that ever be right, some of my own experiences with relatives care matches with sqads evaluation, poor often, some downright dangerous. There are very good people who work in the NHS, but there are some who shouldn't ever be there, in fact not in any job to do with people, patient care.
Sorry anneasquith - getting back to your original point, I have no idea whether putting in managers without any extra resources will do any good. I suspect not.
As you can see from my second link 9/14 hospitals did not have high death rates when measured somewhat more accurately.
Sqad, here is the interactive link, click on the green cross by Quality Care and the other indicators will show; as well as ranking scores you can see the raw percentages.
http://
Here is another link - this time to a Royal Society of Medicine paper (2011) comparing 17 countries, showing the NHS is one the most cost-effective systems.
http://
So it's not conjecture and guesswork. I suspect you don't like these links because they do not confirm your views.
The strain on the NHS is considerable at the moment and the cracks are beginning to show - not helped by a massive reorganisation costing billions. I suspect in 5/10 years time we will have a two-tier system with the NHS providing basic needs and a top-up insurance scheme.
As you can see from my second link 9/14 hospitals did not have high death rates when measured somewhat more accurately.
Sqad, here is the interactive link, click on the green cross by Quality Care and the other indicators will show; as well as ranking scores you can see the raw percentages.
http://
Here is another link - this time to a Royal Society of Medicine paper (2011) comparing 17 countries, showing the NHS is one the most cost-effective systems.
http://
So it's not conjecture and guesswork. I suspect you don't like these links because they do not confirm your views.
The strain on the NHS is considerable at the moment and the cracks are beginning to show - not helped by a massive reorganisation costing billions. I suspect in 5/10 years time we will have a two-tier system with the NHS providing basic needs and a top-up insurance scheme.
\\\\So it's not conjecture and guesswork. I suspect you don't like these links because they do not confirm your views.\\\
Of course, you are correct, most posters produce links that support their argument........and i have read "Mirror mirror on the Wall" and the other brief extract which supports your view.
The post is about the NHS itself not a comparison of health care in other countries.
Of course, you are correct, most posters produce links that support their argument........and i have read "Mirror mirror on the Wall" and the other brief extract which supports your view.
The post is about the NHS itself not a comparison of health care in other countries.
Sclyax wrote: "The hospital began to function for the benefit of 'Management',at an expense which made medical and nursing stall the 'poor relations'."
and this makes them different from all other workplaces in what way?
In essence, I'm actually agreeing with you. If workers ever refer to themselves as 'being at the coalface', it harks back to the time when the kind of people who decided their pay and conditions were literally from a different class and had never swung a pick (metaphorical or otherwise) in their lives. (Cue spin-off discussion about whether empathy with the workforce, through shared experience, makes for weak management and tendency to cave in to every demand for better wages, conditions, staff levels, etc.)
By the way, if these managers get all haughty like the bankers, let us not forget that the correct response to "I could get paid double this rate if I went to [Country X,Y, or Z]", the correct response is "Okay. Off you go, then."
and this makes them different from all other workplaces in what way?
In essence, I'm actually agreeing with you. If workers ever refer to themselves as 'being at the coalface', it harks back to the time when the kind of people who decided their pay and conditions were literally from a different class and had never swung a pick (metaphorical or otherwise) in their lives. (Cue spin-off discussion about whether empathy with the workforce, through shared experience, makes for weak management and tendency to cave in to every demand for better wages, conditions, staff levels, etc.)
By the way, if these managers get all haughty like the bankers, let us not forget that the correct response to "I could get paid double this rate if I went to [Country X,Y, or Z]", the correct response is "Okay. Off you go, then."
More managers, fewer nurses. That's the problem. But does anyone round here know what the NHS managers actually DO ?
I'll tell you what they do - they go to meetings. They prepare for meetings, they draw up agenda for meetings, they attend meetings, they draw up minutes of what everyone said and distribute the minutes to everyone who attended, they read the minutes, then they get ready for the next meeting.
The answer is to get every so-called manager in the NHS to list every single thing s/he does every day, with the amount of time each task took. Anyone who spends more than half of his/her time in meetings has to justify this time spent, or be sacked or reorganised.
Then we have the tiniest chance of changing things for the better.
I'll tell you what they do - they go to meetings. They prepare for meetings, they draw up agenda for meetings, they attend meetings, they draw up minutes of what everyone said and distribute the minutes to everyone who attended, they read the minutes, then they get ready for the next meeting.
The answer is to get every so-called manager in the NHS to list every single thing s/he does every day, with the amount of time each task took. Anyone who spends more than half of his/her time in meetings has to justify this time spent, or be sacked or reorganised.
Then we have the tiniest chance of changing things for the better.
viv38...I hope I can speak for everybody here in AB-land by wishing your Dad a speedy recovery. But my experience this year, with a brother who sustained a serious head injury in February doesn't wholeheartedly concur with your experience unfortunately.
When he was in ITC and the next down ward, he had the best treatment that money could buy. But the trouble started when he made sufficient recovery, to go onto an "ordinary" ward.
All the things that we have been reading about in the media happened to him....drinks put out of his reach, lying in wet nappy pads for hours on end, catheters coming adrift and messing the bed up, etc, etc. We found his Call Button disconnected three times in one week, something the Nursing Staff were not aware of until we brought it to their attention. Much in the way that they weren't aware of the wet bed, or the stinking nappy pads.
His meals were put in front of him and then collected 20 mins later, uneaten, because he lacked the necessary skills to feed himself some days.
The result of this is that as a family we made sure that someone was visiting every day if that was possible, just to make sure that these very basic things were done properly. I am 60 years old and my brother is 44 and I changed plenty of his nappies 40-odd years ago but I honestly didn't think I was still be doing it now. Don't even start me on the MRSA, etc !
He has made sufficient progress to be moved to a Neuro Rehab hospital, where the day to day care is vastly improved, and he is now on the mend, albeit very slowly.
The whole affair has been a very chastening experience for the family and we have learn a lot. The most important lesson we have learn is to get your relative out of hospital ASAP.
When he was in ITC and the next down ward, he had the best treatment that money could buy. But the trouble started when he made sufficient recovery, to go onto an "ordinary" ward.
All the things that we have been reading about in the media happened to him....drinks put out of his reach, lying in wet nappy pads for hours on end, catheters coming adrift and messing the bed up, etc, etc. We found his Call Button disconnected three times in one week, something the Nursing Staff were not aware of until we brought it to their attention. Much in the way that they weren't aware of the wet bed, or the stinking nappy pads.
His meals were put in front of him and then collected 20 mins later, uneaten, because he lacked the necessary skills to feed himself some days.
The result of this is that as a family we made sure that someone was visiting every day if that was possible, just to make sure that these very basic things were done properly. I am 60 years old and my brother is 44 and I changed plenty of his nappies 40-odd years ago but I honestly didn't think I was still be doing it now. Don't even start me on the MRSA, etc !
He has made sufficient progress to be moved to a Neuro Rehab hospital, where the day to day care is vastly improved, and he is now on the mend, albeit very slowly.
The whole affair has been a very chastening experience for the family and we have learn a lot. The most important lesson we have learn is to get your relative out of hospital ASAP.
Latest Posts
Reeves Is Now After Your Pension Funds
News12 mins ago
Editor's Blog38 mins ago
Body & Soul40 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles44 mins ago
