Showing posts with label 'Shame on social services. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 'Shame on social services. Show all posts

Friday 8 November 2013

NHS spends £700 on negligence cover for every birth

NHS spends £700 on negligence cover for every birth



Baby's handThere are wide unexplained variations between trusts, the report says

Related Stories

The NHS spends nearly £700 on clinical negligence cover for every live birth in England, a report says.
The review by the National Audit Office said last year this cost nearly £500m - almost a fifth of all spending on maternity.
Public Accounts Committee chairwoman Margaret Hodge said the figure was "absolutely scandalous".
The Department of Health said the NHS is one of the safest places in the world to have a baby.
Having a baby is the most common reason for admission to hospital in England.
The number of births has increased by almost a quarter in the last decade, reaching nearly 700,000 live births.
The public spending watchdog said maternity services were generally good for women and babies, but there was still a lot of scope for improvement.
Its report highlighted "wide unexplained variations" between trusts in rates of complications such as readmissions, injuries and infections.
Laura Blackwell, director of health value for money studies at the National Audit Office, told the BBC the number of maternity claims had risen significantly in recent years.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme, she said: "There has been an increase in claims and we don't cover exactly why. It is the same across the NHS.
"I think it's a complicated picture... further complicated by the fact it takes an average of four years for a claim to be settled... so it's quite hard to draw conclusions about the current state of care."
Clinical negligence
The NAO also pointed to a shortage of midwives and consultants on labour wards. The report concluded that a further 2,300 midwives are required, though their distribution across England varies substantially.
And although it said the level of consultant presence has improved, more than half of units are not meeting the standard recommended by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.
The report noted that between April and September last year more than a quarter of maternity units were closed to admissions for at least half a day because demand outstripped capacity.
Clinical negligence claims for maternity have risen by 80% in the last five years. The cost of cover last year was £482m, and the average payment per claim was £277,000.
Figures from the NHS Litigation Authority released last year showed the health service in England paid out more than £3bn in compensation claims linked to maternity care between 2000 and 2010.

Start Quote

We are many thousands of midwives short of the number needed to deliver safe, high quality care”
Cathy WarwickRoyal College of Midwives
Ms Hodge said: "I find it absolutely scandalous that one fifth of all funding for maternity services, equivalent to around £700 per birth, is spent on clinical negligence cover."
She said the NAO report had shown an urgent need to improve maternity services.
"The department needs to buck up and take responsibility for this. It needs to review its monitoring and reporting process to ensure that all relevant bodies can work effectively together to deliver maternity services that are value for money and fit for purpose."
James (not his real name), a recipient of medical negligence money, told the Today programme the money had helped give his son a better quality of life.
He and his wife did not claim for negligence until six months after the birth of their son, when they realised the costs involved in his care. Their son had been starved of oxygen during birth and now suffers from quadriplegic cerebral palsy, severe brain damage, visual impairment and epilepsy.
Health Minister Dr Dan Poulter said the health service should always learn from any mistakes to improve patient care in the future.
"The NHS remains one of the safest places in the world to have a baby, but on rare occasions care falls below acceptable standards and unsafe care should never be tolerated."

Jacque Gerrard, Royal College of Midwives: "The system is creaking"
He said the service was making progress.
"This report shows that most women have good outcomes and positive experiences of maternity care. We know 84% of women now say they have good care, which has gone up from 75% six years ago. But we are determined to improve further."
Royal College of Midwives chief executive Cathy Warwick said the report backed up what the college had been saying for a long time.
"We are many thousands of midwives short of the number needed to deliver safe, high quality care. Births are at a 40-year high and other figures out this week show that this is set to continue. As the report states, births are also becoming increasingly complex putting even more demands on midwives and maternity services."
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists president Dr David Richmond said the NAO report raised valid concerns.
"Although the UK is generally a safe place for women to give birth, we have known for some time that pressure on maternity services is growing in some areas, particularly inner city conurbations, placing stress on clinicians, managers and patients alike."

More on This Story

Related Stories

Friday 25 October 2013

Quarter of hospitals 'at raised risk of poor care'

Quarter of hospitals 'at raised risk of poor care'

Sir Mike Richards from the Care Quality Commission said the screening tool would help identify higher risk hospitals

Related Stories

A quarter of hospital trusts in England are at raised risk of providing poor care, a review by the regulator shows.
The findings are based on monitoring by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) of a host of data, including death rates, serious errors and patient surveys.
It found 44 out of 161 trusts fell into the two highest risk categories.
The exercise has been carried out as part of the regulator's new hospital inspection regime, which will see inspectors go into every trust by 2015.
The first inspections got under way in September and by Christmas the first 18 will have been completed.

Analysis

This is the first time such comprehensive data has been pulled together in this way.
The work has involved the regulator poring over a mountain of data.
But what does it tell us? The Care Quality Commission is being careful to stress it is not a final rating. Instead, it is being dubbed a screening tool - and like any screening it can throw up erroneous results.
For example, the scoring system actually suggests two of the 11 trusts already placed in special measures should be in band three (medium risk) - although they have been bumped up to band one anyway.
But even taking that into account, it provides one of the clearest indications yet of how trusts are performing against each other.
Patients will undoubtedly be interested in the results until the inspection programme is completed.
It will result in every trust being given a rating of either 'outstanding', 'good', 'requires improvement' or 'inadequate' as part of a shake-up in the system ordered after the Stafford Hospital scandal.
The CQC said the latest information was not a final judgement, but would be used to prioritise which trusts to inspect earlier in the process.
Hospital chief inspector Prof Sir Mike Richards likened the risk review to a form of "screening".
He added: "Our intelligent monitoring helps to give us a good picture of risk within trusts, showing us where we need to focus our inspections."
The regulator has assessed each trust's performance against up to 150 different indicators.
Those performing worse than would be expected on each indicator get marked down as being at risk or elevated risk for that topic.
The number of risk scores they havedetermines which of the bands they are placed in.
Bands one and two - those at highest risk - include 24 trusts and 20 trusts respectively.
The trusts in band one include the 11 trusts already placed in special measures after a review of high mortality rates.
They are joined by Croydon Health Services, which was rated high risk in 12 areas for issues such as patient survey results and whistle-blowing.
Also in band one are Barking, Havering and Redbridge, which was rated high risk in 13 areas including A&E waits and patient surveys, and Aintree, rated high risk in 11 areas including an elevated risk for mortality rates.
How the highest risk trusts compare
Comparison of worst-scoring trusts
Health Foundation chief executive Dr Jennifer Dixon, who is also a CQC board member, said: "It makes sense to use the wealth of routinely available data in the NHS to try to spot patterns which might identify or predict poor quality care for patients.
"The intelligent monitoring tool can never by itself be a crystal ball, but it is a great start and will surely develop over time."
Dr Mark Porter, head of the British Medical Association, said publishing the data was an "important step" towards improving transparency across the NHS, informing and empowering patients and identifying under-performing hospitals.
Dr Mark Porter, Chair of the BMA, said the review was an "important step for the NHS"
But he added: "Hospitals are large, complex organisations so we need to avoid oversimplifying or reducing vast amounts of data to a simple band or rating."
Labour Shadow Health Minister Jamie Reed said: "David Cameron should be ashamed that he's put so many of England's hospitals in this position.
"He siphoned £3bn out of the NHS front-line to blow on a back-office re-organisation nobody voted for. Hospitals were left on a financial knife-edge and they are clearly struggling to maintain standards of patient care after more than three years of chaos."
But Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt said: "Sadly, under the last government, a lack of transparency about poor care meant problems went unchecked for too long, some times with tragic consequences for patients.
"This government is being honest with the public about the quality of care at their local hospitals, and taking tough action where standards aren't up to scratch. Patients and staff deserve nothing less."

More on This Story

Related Stories

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites

Monday 7 October 2013

'Disgraceful" short care visits on rise, says charity

'Disgraceful" short care visits on rise, says charity

Richard Stapely, who has Multiple Sclerosis, says his 30-minute visits are not long enough

Related Stories

Short care visits to elderly and disabled people are "disgraceful" and on the rise, a charity has claimed.
In England, 60% of councils use 15-minute visits, which are not long enough to provide adequate care, Leonard Cheshire Disability says.
The charity says such visits can "force disabled people to choose whether to go thirsty or to go to the toilet".
The government said the Care Bill would prevent "inappropriate" short visits but would not outlaw 15-minute visits.
Leonard Cheshire wants a ban on what it calls the "scandal of flying 15-minute visits", lobbying the government to prevent the practice in England.

Case study

Tracey Currey, from Swindon, was a care worker for two years but left because her employer would not let her do more than the "bare minimum" for clients.
She said: "I was forever in trouble with my company because I always went over my time.
"There was usually a care plan in place telling you what was needed at each visit but there was always more to do. I would stay and do everything that was needed.
"What is a carer to do on arriving for a 15-minute call to find the client soiled, confused and extremely distraught?
"What would the priorities be? To administer the medication as instructed, or to clean and change the client, or to make a hot drink and try to calm and reassure the client? All three in my book, but the present times do not allow for this.
"It is simply atrocious how this has gone on for so long. Care companies, agencies and councils getting away with this, money having become top priority and the compassion, love and care that should be shown to each and every elderly person has long gone, been thrown out of the window."
'Ridiculous split'
Care minister Norman Lamb said the government "can't ban these short visits completely" because they are useful in some circumstances, such as when a carer visits to give someone medicine.
But he told the BBC a 15-minute visit was "completely inappropriate" when people needed things like feeding or bathing.
"We're actually introducing an amendment to the Care Bill this week which will require councils to focus on an individual's wellbeing when they're organising care on their behalf, and so this sort of very short visit for personal care would not meet that standard," he said.
He also said the government plans to "force" the NHS and local government to work better together and end the "ridiculous split" between health and social care.
A report published by Leonard Cheshiresaid short visits "simply do not allow enough time to deliver good-quality care".
It said data from 63 local authorities pointed to a 15% rise in such visits in the last five years, and said some in councils more than 75% of care visits were carried out in less than 15 minutes.
The charity's latest research looks at England alone, but in August Unison accused many councils in Scotland of providing "care on the cheap" by arranging 15-minute home visits, and in June the union said 83% of Welsh councils were doing the same.
Research by the UK Homecare Association published last year suggested 87% of home visits in Northern Ireland lasted 30 minutes or less, the highest proportion in the UK (73% in England and 42% in both Scotland and Wales).
Separate care bills are currently going through the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly.
Sandie Keene from the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services: "We're all committed to making sure that we all continue to get it right"
Chief executive Clare Pelham said visits should be at least 30 minutes long.
"It is disgraceful to force disabled people to choose whether to go thirsty or to go to the toilet by providing care visits as short as 15 minutes long," she said.
Ms Pelham said most people need 40 minutes to get up, washed, dressed and have breakfast.
"We are treating disabled and older people as if they are robots to be serviced, rather than real people who deserve to be treated with kindness and consideration," she added.
But the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (Adass), which represents care managers, argued it was "totally wrong" to suggest all caring tasks require more than 15 minutes.
Sandie Keene, the association's president, said some short visits were "fully justified and fully adequate".
It was "frankly naive to believe that simply by abolishing 15-minute slots a magic wand will have been waved, and improvements automatically achieved in our care services," she added.
Ms Keene said social workers and their managers had to make "horrendously difficult choices" every day to give the best possible care with limited resources.
Leonard Cheshire wants peers to back a ban on short visits by amendingthe government's Care Bill when it is debated in the House of Lords on Wednesday.
Care manager Tina Blake: "It's very difficult, it's very stressful for the person, and it's certainly stressful for the care worker as well"
Time pressure
Speaking to BBC Radio 5 live, Rosaleen, a Thames Valley care worker who gave only her first name, said 15-minute visits usually overrun.
But she said the short time available still forced carers to make choices such as whether to leave someone alone with a hot drink which they might spill on themselves, or sit with them while they drink but fail to get them ready for bed.
Asked if people's safety was being compromised by visits being too short, she replied: "Their safety, their independence, their dignity."
Another care worker told the BBC that travel time was not included in her pay, so she would work unpaid time every day travelling between appointments.
Sally Lubanov, 83, who is house-bound, said even in 30-minute visits "nothing got done" because carers would take some time booking in, checking what the previous visitor had done and preparing for whatever tasks needed doing.
She said 15-minute visits might be fine for giving someone medicine, but for people living alone it was "wonderful to see someone" and short visits allowed no time for conversation.
The Local Government Association (LGA), said social care was "substantially underfunded" and councils were under increasing pressure.
"Significant cuts to council funding mean local authorities are struggling to meet the rising demand for home care visits," said Katie Hall, chairwoman of the LGA's community and wellbeing board.
She said 15-minute visits "should never be the sole basis for care", but added: "In some circumstances such as administering medication they can be appropriate, but only as part of a wider comprehensive care plan involving longer one-to-one visits."
Leonard Cheshire Disability said a survey of 2,025 people found 93% of those who expressed an opinion agreed 15 minutes was "not long enough to support a disabled or older person to do everyday things like wash, dress and get out of bed in the morning"

Tuesday 17 September 2013

Daniel Pelka: Serious case review finds 'missed opportunities

Daniel Pelka: Serious case review finds 'missed opportunities'

Report says Daniel was 'invisible' at times.

Related Stories

Chances were missed to help a child who was murdered by his mother and her partner after suffering "terrifying and dreadful" abuse, a report has found.
A serious case review found Daniel Pelka, four, was "invisible" at times and "no professional tried sufficiently hard enough" to talk to him.
He was starved and beaten for months before he died in March 2012, at his Coventry home.
The review said "critical lessons" must be "translated into action".
Magdelena Luczak, 27, and Mariusz Krezolek, 34, were told they must serve at least 30 years in jail, after being found guilty of murder at Birmingham Crown Court in July.
'Shocking reading'
The court heard Daniel saw a doctor in hospital for a broken arm, arrived at school with bruises and facial injuries, and was seen scavenging for food.
A teaching assistant described him as a "bag of bones" and the trial heard he was "wasting away". At the time of his death the schoolboy weighed just over a stone-and-a-half (10kg).

Start Quote

There is no easy way to protect children but it seems we make the same mistakes again and again ”
Much of the detail that emerged in the trial about the level of abuse Daniel suffered was "completely unknown" to the professionals involved, the review found.
No-one has been disciplined as a direct result of Daniel's death.
The report by Ron Lock did not blame or identify any individual agency but he said the professionals involved were "too optimistic" about what they saw.
"Workload was a potential issue - child protection is a very complex matter - and perhaps when they felt reassured they moved on to the next case," Mr Lock told BBC News.
"But they need to be stronger and have a much more inquiring mind. They needed to act on what was in front of them."
The review's key findings include:
  • Police were called to 26 separate incidents at the family home, many involving domestic violence and alcohol abuse
  • Excuses made by Daniel's "controlling" mother were accepted by agencies
  • Professionals needed to "think the unthinkable" and act upon what they saw, rather than accept "parental versions"
  • Daniel's "voice was not heard" because English was not his first language and he lacked confidence
  • No record of "any conversation" held with Daniel about his home life, his experiences outside school, or of his relationships with his siblings, mother and her partners
  • None of the agencies involved could have predicted Daniel's death
  • There were "committed attempts" by his school and health workers to address his "health and behavioural issues" in the months before his death
  • But "too many opportunities were missed for more urgent and purposeful interventions"
  • Two of those chances were when Daniel was taken to an accident and emergency department with injuries
Bruises
In March 2008, when Daniel was eight months old, he was treated for a minor head wound. In January 2011, when he was three-and-a-half, he was taken to A&E with a fractured arm.
The review said the hospital "rightly raised immediate concerns about the [fractured arm]" and a meeting was held to decide if it was caused by a fall from a settee, as Daniel's mother claimed, or was the result of abuse.
The meeting decided Luczak's explanation was "plausible".
But the review said the reasons for other bruises found on Daniel at the time, which his mother claimed came from bicycle accidents, were not "fully explored".
The Children and Families Minister Edward Timpson said the report made "shocking reading" and "laid bare" the lack of intervention by professionals.
Mr Timpson said he had written to the Coventry Safeguarding Children Board asking for a clearer analysis as to why the mistakes occurred.
'Invisible' Daniel
Amy Weir, the board's chair, said she found the report "disheartening, disappointing and generally worrying".

The tragic life of Daniel Pelka

Daniel Pelka
Ms Weir said the idea of Daniel being "invisible" was "at the heart of this case".
"I think for Daniel there's something which we've never fully been able to get to grips with," she said.
"The issue about Daniel mainly being Polish speaking" should have been overcome and there were "significant issues" about his mother and her ability to try to "hoodwink the professionals", she added.
Assistant Chief Constable Garry Forsyth, of West Midlands Police, said: "We accept that Daniel was not 'given a voice'."
He said the report "raised the lack of consistency" in officers dealing with separate domestic abuse reports and the force needed "a more holistic approach".
The report said that due to such inconsistency, Daniel's lack of language and low confidence was not picked up and would have made it "almost impossible for him to reveal the abuse he was suffering".
"Overall, the 'rule of optimism' appeared to have prevailed," it said.
The review said Daniel could have been offered greater protection if the professionals involved had applied a "much more enquiring mind".
It also identified school staff did not link Daniel's physical injuries with their concerns about his apparent obsession with food, which his mother claimed was caused by a medical condition.
Daniel Pelka's injuries
Gill Mulhall, Daniel's head teacher at Little Heath Primary in Coventry, said: "His mother was a convincing manipulator.
"If we were aware of the bigger picture of his life or had doubts about her, we would of course have acted differently.
"We want to see changes where schools are aware of concerns from other agencies which affect our pupils."
Sharon Binyon, medical director of the Coventry and Warwickshire Partnership NHS Trust, believes the service as a whole did not do enough.
"Coventry has one of the lowest numbers of health visitors per child in the country. That was recognised and we're working with NHS England," she said.
"Since the time of Daniel's death the number of health visitors has now doubled and we expect to see it trebled by 2015."
Magdelena Luczak and her partner, Mariusz KrezolekPolice were called to several domestic incidents involving Mariusz Krezolek and Magdelena Luczak
Peter Wanless, the NSPCC's chief executive officer, said ultimately Daniel's mother and her partner were responsible for his death but it was right to look at what could have been done differently.
"Processes were followed correctly much of the time but processes alone do not save children," he said.
Geoffrey Robinson, MP for Coventry North West, described Daniel Pelka's death as "a great disgrace" for the city and called on the council's chief executive, Martin Reeves, to consider his position.
Mr Reeves, said the city had "never faced such a tragic case" and staff needed to "learn quickly" from the review.
"The best legacy for Daniel is to make sure we move forward and I want to have a part to play in that future," he said.
"This can't be about a witch hunt or vilification of professionals."

More on This Story

Related Stories

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites

Featured post

More patients in Scotland given antidepressants

More patients in Scotland given antidepressants 13 October 2015   From the section Scotland Image copyright Thinkstock Image ca...