Thursday 15 October 2015

In court with the Mid Staffordshire NHS Trust.


The Mid Staffordshire Hospital scandal continues; The health and safety executive are now prosecuting the Health Authority for some of the most blatantly negligent of the 600 odd deaths caused by poor staff and management at this nightmare group of hospitals.

Except it is being wound up and effectively a 'legal body' is being taken to court when it should have been the management and those directly responsible.

This would be just a farce except one of the deaths occurred last year - long after the scandal was exposed, the official report was published and  a 'new' trust created to take over.

You can read about Mid Staffs and The Francis Report on the archive pages of this Blog.

This is from The Daily Telegraph;
 

Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust charged over four deaths

The trust at the centre of the worst ever NHS scandal is facing criminal charges over the deaths of four patients

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The trust which ran Stafford Hospital is to face criminal charges related to the deaths of four patients - one as recent as last year.
 
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has brought charges against Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust over the deaths of four elderly patients between 2005 and May 2014.

Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust was at the centre of one of the biggest scandals to hit the health service over the deaths of hundreds of patients, amid appalling failings in care.

The HSE said the charges related to the deaths of Patrick Daly, aged 89, who died in May 2014, Edith Bourne, aged 83, who died in July 2013, Ivy Bunn, aged 90, who died in November 2008, and Lillian Tucker, aged 77 who died in October 2005.

Mrs Tucker died after a junior doctor gave her a penicillin-based drug despite being told she was allergic to the antibiotic, an inquest heard. She had suffered fall, which led to a small fracture while on a family holiday in the area.

His son later said he "would not touch the hospital with a barge pole" after detailing the family's repeated warnings about his mother's allergy.

The HSE said it had charged Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust following a "thorough and comprehensive investigation into the circumstances of four deaths of patients under its care".

The trust is due to appear before Stafford Magistrates on November 4. A new trust began to run the hospital last November.

Last week police and health officials said they are investigating claims of an NHS “cover-up” over the death of a three-year old boy, Jonnie Meek, at Stafford Hospital, last year.
 
The parents of Jonnie Meek, who died at Stafford hospital, say failings were covered up .

This probe will check claims that statements from health workers who witnessed his death were falsified.
It is very rare for the HSE to act in cases involving clinical failings, and the body has previously been criticised for its reluctance to prosecute.
 
The Mid Staffs inquiry accused the body of “looking for reasons for not taking action rather than starting from a consideration of what is in the public interest. “
 
“The more serious and widespread a failure is, the less likely it is that the HSE will decide to intervene, even where it is apparent that no other regulator is likely to do so,” Robert Francis, the chairman of the inquiry said.

Last year the same trust was fined £200,000 over the death of Gillian Astbury, 66, who died in 2007 because nurses at Stafford hospital failed to give her the routine insulin she required to stay alive.
Wayne Owen, HSE principal inspector in the West Midlands, said: "We have concluded our investigation into the death of four patients at Stafford Hospital and have decided there is sufficient evidence and it is in the public interest to bring criminal proceedings in this case."

The trust remains in place as a legal entity but no longer provides patient services.
University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust took over the running of Stafford Hospital and Royal Stoke University Hospital.

The Mid Staffs special administrator Tim Rideout said the remaining "shell organisation" would oversee any "potential criminal liabilities".
He added: "I am committed to bringing matters to a conclusion as efficiently and effectively as possible in the best interests of the families concerned.

Neil Harris
(a don't stop till you drop production)

Home: helpmesortoutthenhs.blogspot.com

Contact me: neilwithpromisestokeep@gmail.com

 

Wednesday 14 October 2015

Safety staffing levels to be ignored.

NHS 'backtracking' on ward nurse numbers introduced after Mid Staffs

Critics fear safety will be sacrificed to cut costs after NHS bosses tell hospitals that 1:8 nurse-to-patient ratio is a guide, not a requirement
 
NHS bosses have told hospitals they no longer have to ensure that one nurse is caring for no more than eight patients at a time, in order to help tackle a £2bn black hole that has left 80% of hospitals facing deficits of up to £100m each.
The letter states: “We would stress that a 1:8 ratio is a guide not a requirement. It should not be unthinkingly adhered to. Achieving the right number and balance of clinical and support staff to deliver quality care based on patient needs in an efficient way that makes the best possible use of available resources is the key issue for provider [hospital] boards.
 
 
The move, set out in a letter to all hospital chiefs, has sparked fears that patient safety will be sacrificed to help hospitals cut costs. It makes clear that financial considerations are deemed to be as important as the safety and quality of care patients receive when deciding how many nurses should be on duty.

Cash-strapped hospitals may be tempted to cut their nurse staffing levels as a result of the new advice, the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) warned. Staffing takes up 70% of the NHS’s budget and its bill for employing temporary staff to plug gaps in rotas, especially expensive agency nurses, has hit £3.3bn in the last two years.

The letter has been signed by NHS England, the Care Quality Commission, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice), and the regulator NHS Improvement. It recommends that hospitals can ask health professionals, such as physiotherapists, to help look after patients, and use technology to monitor their condition, to reduce the need for nurses on duty.

It urges hospitals “to take a rounded view of staffing” that shows they are “making the best use of resources” as well as providing safe care. It lists a set of variables, including how ill patients are, and then adds: “In some cases these factors will mean a higher number of nurses per patient, and in other cases it will mean a lower number or different configuration of staff can be justified.”

It adds: “It is therefore important to look at staffing in a flexible way which is focused on the quality of care, patient safety and efficiency rather than just numbers and ratios of staff.”
The NHS is under heavy pressure from ministers to make £22bn of “efficiency savings" by 2020 to help plug the £30bn gap expected to have developed in its finances.
The new advice is a substantial downgrading of guidelines produced only last year by Nice, which insisted that no nurse should look after more than eight patients to ensure good, safe care. That ratio was widely hailed as a way of avoiding a repeat of the Mid Staffs scandal, in which a lack of nurses was found to be a key cause of the appalling care.

Howard Catton, the RCN’s head of policy, said: “There’s a risk that people in the NHS may interpret this letter as a green light to row back on safe staffing when the NHS’s finances are in the perilous state that they are.”

However, he added that other suggestions in the letter, such as allowing hospital managers to use their professional judgment about how many nurses were needed and not rigidly applying fixed ratios, were “common sense”.

Labour said the NHS circular showed that patient care could be put at risk as a result of the fast-ballooning deficit.
“The idea that hospitals can ignore safe-staffing guidance will alarm patients. Safe staffing levels are essential for patient safety and were a key recommendation of the Francis report,” said Heidi Alexander, the shadow health secretary.
“If ministers attempt to balance the books in the NHS by cutting staff and putting patients at risk, then Labour will oppose them all the way. It is yet further evidence that the financial crisis in the NHS is now a real threat to patient care.”
Ian Wilson, chair of the British Medical Association’s representative body, said: “Adequate staffing levels are vital to deliver safe, high-quality patient care. Flatline funding at a time of rising demand has left services and the frontline staff who deliver them under enormous pressure. The solution is not to stretch existing staff even further, but to ensure the NHS has the resources needed to deliver safe care.”

But hospital bosses welcomed the move away from the 1:8 ratio. “NHS England boss Simon Stevens deserves credit for persuading Jeremy Hunt to soften his previous hard line on safety at any cost. We need to be pragmatic in the face of spiralling deficits,” one told the Guardian .
“It will give more discretion to senior nursing colleagues, giving them a vote of confidence. A ‘one size fits all’ is not the solution to staffing levels; it is about empowering frontline leaders.”
Canadace Imison, director of healthcare systems at the Nuffield Trust thinktank, said: “This letter shows a welcome attempt by NHS regulators to deliver a consistent message about safe staffing levels. It also rightly recognises that the 1:8 nurse to patient ratio is a crude metric and not to be seen as a benchmark.”

But it also leaves NHS trusts no wiser about whether they should under-staff or overspend in order to provide high-quality care, Imison added.

                                ----------//----------

This article in today's 'Guardian' is very worrying; we spent two years analysing the appalling mistreatment of patients at Mid Staffordshire Hospitals and the long awaited official report made clear (among many other recommendations) that a minimum of one nurse to 8 patients was an absolute requirement.

This was endorsed by N.I.C.E. and the other regulatory bodies.

Now that money is short?

Forget it.

All the studies show that patient safety and outcomes are worse when there are too few nurses to patients. We came to this conclusion years after other advanced countries.

For some reason, we have historically trained too few nurses and doctors and there is always a shortage.

Secondly, there is a historic reluctance to accept that too few staff is dangerous.

Neil Harris
(a don't stop till you drop production)

Home: helpmesortoutthenhs.blogspot.com

Contact me: neilwithpromisestokeep@gmail.com