London
Ambulance Service (LAS) has not taken children by emergency ambulance to King
George Hospital A&E since November 2010.
Patients
need to be taken to the setting that will provide them with the best care and
the best outcomes. This won’t always be to the nearest hospital. This principle
has saved hundreds of lives in recent years for stroke and heart attack
patients in London alone.
With
a dedicated ‘high dependency’ suite for children at Queen’s Hospital, improving
care for those who need more intensive nursing and medical input, it was agreed
that children who were acutely unwell should be taken directly to that service.
This ensures that children with complex and high dependency needs receive the
appropriate care as quickly as possible and prevents any delays in care from
transfer between sites.
This
decision taken by LAS was agreed by the
Trust and shared with the local councils’ Health Overview and Scrutiny
committees and commissioners.
BHRUT are clearly saying the change was due to a high dependency suite at Queens hospital.
Well done to the Wanstead and Woodford Guardian for printing the story here today at
http://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/rbnews/11305938.Lack_of_leadership_blamed_for_children_being_turned_away_from_A_E/
stating the real reasons as
- A lack of clinical leadership within children's services
- Compliance with the Children's National Service Framework, a department of health programme for the health of children, being patchy
- Paediatricians being overworked and also being required to work in the neo-natal unit
- A highly-complex and poorly managed staff rota
- Inadequate medical staff assigned to the medical rotas
- Gaps in the staff rota
- Assessment by a senior doctor was not always possible
BHRUT say the LAS or London Ambulance Service decided not to take Children to King George Hospital.
But London Ambulance Service say the decision was made by BHRUT per the email received by me on 10th June.
Dear Mr Walker
Thank
you for your email which has been forwarded to the Patient Experiences
Department by our Chief Executive. I apologise for the delay in
responding.
I
have been advised that the BHRUT document "Strategy for Change -
Children's Services" (July 2010) highlighted a number of concerns and
shortfalls in the paediatric service across both the Queens and King
George’s sites and as a result of this, the Trust
wanted to cohort sicker and more complex patients on one site (Queens). This included patients needing anything more than 24 hours of care.
In
discussing this with the LAS, we were asked whether crews could
identify patients with more complex needs or who might need to be
admitted for more than 24 hours, and convey these patients to Queens.
The
Trust felt that this would be unreasonable given the difficulty of
making an accurate assessment in a short time, and the potential that
children have for deteriorating rapidly. Getting the initial assessment
wrong could potentially place crews / the LAS at risk.
It
was agreed with BHRUT that we would convey all children presenting
through the 999 service to Queens, and that we would only convey
children to King George’s if they had been referred by a GP and
specifically accepted by the paediatricians.
This decision was reviewed and upheld in a number of meetings in the year that followed. my underlining ENDS
I will be asking Cllr Streeting, the Redbridge Council spokesperson for health to look into this.
The secret 2010 decision to stop children going to KGH A&E was the wrong one, and along with the related 2010 decision to cut child beds at KGH has been a factor in the child bed shortage which means children wait longer at A&E than they need to. What should have happened in 2010 is that KGH was given the resources to look after children properly on the KGH site. Why should Redbridge parents have to put up with a second rate service for their children?
