Archived decisions
Hampshire County CouncilHealth Overview and Scrutiny Committee Item 6 31 January 2006 Inquiries Received and Action Taken Report of the Chief Executive |
Contact: Denise Holden ext. 7338
e-mail: [email protected]
1. Summary and Purpose
1.1. This report provides Members with information about the issues brought to the attention of the Committee and the action taken as a result of these referrals. It sets out the inquiries received, the source of this inquiry and action taken. Where appropriate comments have been included and copies of briefings or other information attached.
1.2. The approach adopted provides the route through which Patient and Public Involvement Forums (P&PIFs) and other partner organisations (Hampshire district councils, NHS organisations, voluntary and independent sector providers and organisations that are representative of social care service users and carers) can raise issues with the Committee.
1.3. Where inquiries raised with the Committee are already subject to monitoring or other performance management activities the action taken will be focused on the local resolution of inquiries through appropriate sign-posting to the agency best placed to respond.
1.4. Where an issue cannot be satisfactorily resolved between the parties concerned then the Committee can consider options for further action.
1.5. New issues raised with the Committee, and those that are subject to routine reporting are set out in Table One of this report.
1.6. The recommendations included in this report support Aim 5 of the Corporate Strategy (Improving Services) through the overview and scrutiny of health services in the Hampshire County Council area.
Table One: Inquiries Received and Action Taken
Topic/inquiry |
Source |
Action Taken |
Comment |
Temporary Closure of the Grange and Blackbrook Birth Centres |
East Hants District Council, County Councillors, Local People |
Refer to Item 5, section 9 Continue to monitor. |
This has been a highly controversial action that cuts across accepted good practice. |
Compliance with NICE Guidance |
Local MP |
The presentation to the joint Committee on 5 December confirmed that: · A consistent approach will be fully implemented across H&IOW from 1 April · Eligible families will be able to receive some services from 1 January · PCTs were seeking the views of stakeholders about the criteria · The joint HOSC has asked that there be a single appeal process across Hampshire to ensure consistency in decision making |
|
Ambulance Service Estates Strategy |
New Forest DC, Ringwood TC, New Forest P&PIF |
The consultation on the national programme and the PCT/SHA reconfiguration associated with `Commissioning a patient led NHS' was launched on the 14 December. It was expected that the estates strategy would be included in this, however this is not the case |
|
Return of routine neurology referrals |
Committee member |
Confirmation that the back log has been resolved is awaited |
|
Transfer of upper GI cancer surgery from Frimely Park to Royal Surrey County Hospital |
County Cllr |
Additional information has been sought on the background to the decision to move these services and the impact this may have on the quality of care. Initial comments and suggested next steps are attached at Appendix One |
|
Progress with Aldershot Health Centre |
Committee Member |
Members will receive a presentation on progress with this work on the 28 March. |
|
Closure of New Street practice |
Committee members |
Following the conviction of the GP at this practice the PCT has sought another provider through the agreed tendering process. This has not been successful and the PCT now has no choice but to close the practice. This action is supported by the LMC. Having been appraised of the action of the PCT to secure an alternative provider the Chairman has indicated that this is not a substantial service change as all patients will be able to re-register with other local practices. Those affected by the changes, including local councillors, would need to be kept up-dated on the situation
|
|
Independent Sector Procurement: Diagnostics |
Committee Member |
The SHA has signalled its intention to purchase a range of diagnostic services from the private sector as part of a national programme. Further information is attached at Appendix Two. Particular queries that the Committee may wish to raise with regard to this proposal include: · The volume of activity purchased and the `choice' initiative · Payments that exceed the agreed national tariffs · The quality of service · The need for appropriately trained and qualified staff · Impact on NHS providers in the area |
2. Recommendations for Action:
2.1. Closure of the Grange and Blackbrook Birthing Centres
_ Please see Item 5 section 9
2.2. Compliance with NICE Guidance
_ Members are advised of the final criteria for accessing these services when these are available
2.3. Ambulance Service Estates Strategy
_ The Trust provides confirmation about the way in which this proposal will be taken forward
2.4. Return of Neurology Referrals
_ The Committee continues to pursue this matter until the Has confirms that the backlog has been cleared and the referrals from GPs are being dealt within the target waiting times
2.5. Transfer of Cancer Services
_ Members note the questions identified in paragraph 5 of Appendix One.
_ A special meeting is held, with Surry HOSC, to provide an opportunity for key stakeholders to respond to these questions and any other queries that members may wish to raise.
2.6. Aldershot Health Centre
_ Members receive the presentation on 28 March
2.7. New Street Practice
_ Members confirm the advice given by the Chairman
2.8. Independent Sector Procurement
_ The Committee writes to the SHA requesting clarification on the points raised above and any other issues raised by members.
Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers
The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.
NB the list excludes:
1. Published works
2. Documents that disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.
Transfer of Upper GI Cancer Unit from Frimley Park to Royal Surrey Hospital in Guildford issue
Background
1. Newspapers report a potential issue concerning planned transfer of the Upper Gastro-intestinal Cancer Unit from Frimely Park Hospital to The Royal Surrey Hospital in Guildford. Frimely Park is on the border of the Hampshire District of Rushmoor and Surrey. Patients in the Blackwater Valley and Hart PCT/Districts of Hart and Rushmore are within the catchment area of Frimely Park Hospital, therefore this proposed change of service delivery is of interest to the Committee.
2. Transfer of the Upper GI Cancer Unit is an initiative of the Surrey, West Sussex and Hampshire (SWSH) Cancer Network with the intention of following the recommendation of the NICE guidance to consolidate expertise in Cancer Centres. In May 2004 a decision was taken to move surgical services for patients with pancreatic and oesophago gastric cancers to the site of the Royal Surrey County Hospital in Guildford, adjacent to the St Luke's Cancer Centre. The agreed transfer date for OG activity is October 2006.
3. Whilst there is a determination to move towards consolidating cancer expertise at the RSC Hospital in Guildford, there is nevertheless significant concern from some clinicians and members of the public based on a number of factors including:
4. A peer review of RSC in 2002 apparently expressed concern about RSC hospitals cancer service, but a peer review published late December 2005 "wished to acknowledge that they considered this unit (i.e. the Upper GI Cancer Unit at FP) to be a Centre of Excellence" . The report also states "Given the current capacity issues and severe financial constraints on the health economy, the Review Team has reservations about the Network's ability to successfully implement the IOG plan." (i.e. the Improving Outcomes Guidance plan to move the unit from FP to RSCH at Guildford) There is therefore concern by some FP clinicians that it may not be in patients' best interests to be referred to a newly established service at Guildford when a centre of excellence with very good outcomes already exists at FP.
5. (It should be noted, however, that the SWSH Network Director, when asked to comment, said it should be remembered that on the basis of the Peer Review `Quality Measures' and summarised in the report, the outcomes between the Upper GI Cancer units at FP and RSCH are not very different. In addition, he pointed out, RSCH has improved its infrastructure and resources since the peer review visit.). The Committee will wish to determine:
· The actions taken by the Royal Surrey to address the issues identified in the peer review reports.
· The way in which the views of patients and the public have informed the decision to move the unit, in accordance with section 11 of the Health & Social Care Act
· The means by which the quality of care and service provided at the Royal Surrey will be assessed to ensure that it is equal to, or better than, that currently provided at Frimely Park.
Recommendation
It is recommended that a special meeting is held, with Surry HOSC, to provide an opportunity for key stakeholders to respond to these questions and any other queries that members may wish to raise.