Mid Stafford Report

#2
Wait until the compensation claims start coming in then scapegoats will be found who will mysteriously have retired or are about to on grounds of ill heath.
 
#3
No one is to blame, it was 'the system'!

And the guilty exit stage left to new posts with other healthcare trusts.
 
#4
The amount of bandwagon hoppers since it 1st came to light is quite amazing, yes it was a bad in a couple of wards, not the whole hospital, but thats what you get when it is run by business people and run as business and not a service IMHO.

It is also 4 years since the investigation, and the hospital has suffered ever since through the bad reputation it had. I reckon there are more ward managers and matrons than there are nurses. I have been in there several times, and my treatment was fine, today I do not think Stafford hospital is any worse than a lot of NHS hospitals
 
#5
The amount of bandwagon hoppers since it 1st came to light is quite amazing, yes it was a bad in a couple of wards, not the whole hospital, but thats what you get when it is run by business people and run as business and not a service IMHO.

It is also 4 years since the investigation, and the hospital has suffered ever since through the bad reputation it had. I reckon there are more ward managers and matrons than there are nurses. I have been in there several times, and my treatment was fine, today I do not think Stafford hospital is any worse than a lot of NHS hospitals
Bit tricky to be a bandwagon hopper on this one..... Main public Witness requirement was to have a family member who died in the Hospital......only 1,200 of then qualified.
 
#6
Interesting interview with Mike Farrar, the NHS confederation CEO on R4 this morning, blaming the culture of over regulation that exists and audits to audit why previous audits have failed.

He seemed to be saying that NHS management culture needed to change, but whether that'll filter through to the creme de la creme(!) of British managers running the trusts is another matter entirely.
 
#7
As a recent patient of Stafford I can only admire how the staff carry out their duties despite endless investigations and constant observation by the press pack parked up there.
 
#8
Bit tricky to be a bandwagon hopper on this one..... Main public Witness requirement was to have a family member who died in the Hospital......only 1,200 of then qualified.
That was total deaths during the period of the enquiry,total of 160 witnesses were called, and just over 400 deaths were queried and even then it states not all of those were preventable while going through treatment, media reporting is not always the most accurate now is it?
 
#9
Report highlights concerns over 'alarmingly high' death rates at 'full to bursting' hospitals - Home News - UK - The Independent

12 trusts fell short on two of four mortality rate indicators - which include deaths after surgery and the deaths of patients who were admitted for minor ailments or “low-risk conditions”.
Five NHS trusts warned over high death rates - Health News - Health & Families - The Independent

Analysts said that the SHMI was higher than expected at Colchester Hospital University NHS Foundation Trust, Tameside Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Blackpool Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust for two years running.
that's just 2 media reports, and quotes from the links
 
#10
The amount of bandwagon hoppers since it 1st came to light is quite amazing, yes it was a bad in a couple of wards, not the whole hospital, but thats what you get when it is run by business people and run as business and not a service IMHO.

It is also 4 years since the investigation, and the hospital has suffered ever since through the bad reputation it had. I reckon there are more ward managers and matrons than there are nurses. I have been in there several times, and my treatment was fine, today I do not think Stafford hospital is any worse than a lot of NHS hospitals
'bad on a couple of wards'?

That's an interesting take on 1,200 patients dying of neglect that would shame a 3rd world country
.
It was supposed to be run as a hospital providing safety and care, not a target and cost driven Konzentrationslager. It was really that simple an issue.
 
#11
'bad on a couple of wards'?

That's an interesting take on 1,200 patients dying of neglect that would shame a 3rd world country
.
It was supposed to be run as a hospital providing safety and care, not a target and cost driven Konzentrationslager. It was really that simple an issue.
A perfect comparison there..... Thank you
 
#12
Not disagreeing with you as such,I already said it was run as business not a service, but once again you are wrong on the total figure of neglected deaths the total of deaths for the hospital was 1200 during those 3 years,2006-2009, not the total that was counted as "neglect, lack of care" read the report not the media numbers, it was quarter of the total, and yes it is still high,i am saying that the hospital shouldn't be judged now the same as 4-7 years ago.

Have you ever been treated at the hospital in question? or a third world hospital? seen at first hand how they treat patients at Stafford hospital now?
 
#13
Raw death rate figures are not particularly useful in deciding whether a particular hospital is underperforming or not. There are reasons why some hospitals have high death rates e.g. demographics- in that there might be a high proportion of eldery people in the catchment area, no dedicated terminal care in the area- meaning that people die in the hospital rather than in the hospice or their own homes, specialist service- the hospital might have a ward/unit that takes very ill people because it has facilities and skills not available elsewhere, etc.

The old adage that 60% of people know that 90% of statistics are made up applies here.
 
C

cloudbuster

Guest
#14
I'd like to know if a confidential reporting system would have made a difference; giving staff and patients the means to report misconduct and malpractice while protecting their identities, much as NHS Scotland is introducing this Spring?
 
#15
Not disagreeing with you as such,I already said it was run as business not a service, but once again you are wrong on the total figure of neglected deaths the total of deaths for the hospital was 1200 during those 3 years,2006-2009, not the total that was counted as "neglect, lack of care" read the report not the media numbers, it was quarter of the total, and yes it is still high,i am saying that the hospital shouldn't be judged now the same as 4-7 years ago.

Have you ever been treated at the hospital in question? or a third world hospital? seen at first hand how they treat patients at Stafford hospital now?
Try this one...

http://www.hsj.co.uk/home/francis-r...histleblowers-and-the-inquiry/5054502.article

How Mid Stafford treats patients NOW is a complete irrelevance. The fact is that for far too long the Hospital was dysfunctional with a mortality rate that was too high by any measure.
 
#16
A mate of mine came out of there in the mid 80s after a serious motorbike smash, the obvious injuries aside, it took the hospitals in Manchester years to sort out the mess caused by Stafford **** ups and simple mistakes!
 
#17
Am i the only one who has had a positive experience of the NHS? I mean the food was shite but that was the least of my worries with bones hanging out left right and centre. CHEERS DOC :D
My NHS experience was mixed, a very clear pattern that never varied:

Day staff were excellent, knew their stuff and did well.

Night staff an ever changing bunch of disinterested unsupervised ********* who really did not give a shit about anyone or anything.
 
#18
Not disagreeing with you as such,I already said it was run as business not a service, but once again you are wrong on the total figure of neglected deaths the total of deaths for the hospital was 1200 during those 3 years,2006-2009, not the total that was counted as "neglect, lack of care" read the report not the media numbers, it was quarter of the total, and yes it is still high,i am saying that the hospital shouldn't be judged now the same as 4-7 years ago.

Have you ever been treated at the hospital in question? or a third world hospital? seen at first hand how they treat patients at Stafford hospital now?
Stafford? Nope, missed the privilege of being treated there. 3rd world hospitals? Yep, been there, done that, but I had this funny idea in my head the NHS was 'better'.
 
#19
The hospital was elite foundation status hospital which gave them much more autonomy from Dept of Health monitoring, so the failings go from the DOH down as Stafford was assessed as being good enough to be granted this.

All medical care starts with a good assessment, at Stafford if admitted to A & E you would likely be triaged by receptionists, so if at intial contact this happens then how can any other result be expected, than which has arisen with the ongoing 'care' and deaths publicised.

No care facility should ever be failing to ensure nutritional/hydration needs of patients are met, this is indefensible, there are plenty more failings but if even the above most basic of needs are not met, then it fails to be care and becomes abuse.

However Stafford is merely the big front page story but the NHS in general has a catalogue of failings, often of not meeting the most basic of human needs.

I fear this inquiry report and its recommendations will have little impact on NHS care, there will be plenty of glossy pamphlets written and assurances made of 'how we have learned blah blah blah, but at end of day will just await the next big scandal.
 
#20
Change will only happen when Senior Management, instead of being allowed to go jumping ship to another Trust when the SHTF, get hauled up before the beak on Criminally Negligent Manslaughter charges.
 

Similar threads

Top