An open letter follows to:
Rob Whiteman Independent
Rob Whiteman Independent
Chair of the East London Health and Care Partnership
Dear Rob
Why BHRUT need to withdraw their misleading Press Release of 17th July
Thank you for replying to me on twitter to support the 17th July 2019 BHRUT press release on King George which for ease of reference, I cut and past at (1) below.
Keith Prince has recently been critical of BHRUT in the Romford Recorder and (2) and Chris Bown the Interim Chief Executive of BHRUT has responded quoting the press release of 17th July (3).
The 17th July 2019 press release is misleading for the following reasons.
a - The title “The A&E unit at King George Hospital” is misleading because it does not specify which type of A&E the authors are writing about. Ordinary people know only one type, which is type 1, type 2 is speciality and type 3 is urgent care. Kings Fund definitions of the A&E types are at (4) below. The press release misleads because it gives the impression a type 1 A&E is being discussed when the reality is only a type 2 A&E is to be guaranteed at the A&E site.
b - The sentence in the 17th July Press Release:
“For the past three months we have been examining what Queen’s Hospital in Romford and King George Hospital in Ilford will look like in the future as part of developing a new clinical strategy.”
is misleading because BHRUT omitted to point out that their review of the clinical strategy started back in November 2017 per the story HERE . BHRUT also forgot to point out that the outcome of the review was decided back in December 2016 per page 7 of the £49M bid HERE Any reader would understand the bid as a plan do close the type 1 A&E unit at King George Hospital. The plan is built on the premise that more patients will be treated at home, hence the phrase “elimination of the need” to support a fourth A&E in NE London at page 26.
c - The sentence:
“We will share our initial ideas with our staff, local people, communities, partners and stakeholders to test our thinking and shape the final clinical strategy.”
cannot be taken seriously as BHRUT hid their December 2016 decision from the public. It was only after campaign to get the bid published was a partial copy published in April 2019.
d - The sentence:
“However, throughout this process we have been clear that the Emergency Department at King George Hospital (KGH) is safe and that there is a need for such provision both now and into the future.”
Is risible in light of BHRUT hiding the fact they intend to close the type 1 A&E at King George per the £49M bid for a type 2 facility at KGH to replace the exisitng type 1 . The existing clinical strategy is clear King George A&E type 1 is to close.
e – The sentence
“The A&E at KGH will continue to be a consultant-led service, open 24 hours a day, with full resuscitation facilities and designated accommodation for the reception of accident and emergency patients (currently known as a Type 1 A&E department).”
misses the words “for all ages” after emergency patients for it to be a type 1 guarantee. The guarantee provided here is merely for a type 2 unit for the elderly.
BHRUT use language very carefully, they initially denied there was a ambulatory care unit on the King George site. It was only when I sent the management a photo of the sign saying the unit existed did BHRUT qualify amend their statement to say there was only an ambulatory care unit, but only one for the elderly see HERE
f - The sentence:
“We have never suggested otherwise.”
Is nonsensical, BHRUT agreed a plan to close the type 1 A&E at King George in 2016. Not only that, the £49M bid document provide a detailed plan to close the type 1 facility, it states the plan has been partially implemented! BHRUT managers have been deceiving the public, patents and elected representatives about their plans for years and I look to you to stop this charade.
g- The sentence:
"We are concerned that ongoing false rumours about the future of the A&E unit at King George Hospital could have an adverse impact on our efforts to recruit and retain vital frontline staff and will worry our residents unnecessarily."
Is a nasty smear and brings BHRUT managers into further disrepute. The latest NHS A&E statistics show BHRUT among the worst performers for type 1 A&E performance. The reason for this is the decision to close 160 beds and their supporting staff set out at page 66 of Redbridge Council report into King George & Queens of February 2018 which was chaired by Wes Streeting MP. This significant reduction in capacity is the cause of the decline of BHRUT A&E performance, not the efforts of campaigners who say BHRUT needs more resources.
For these reasons I request you look into what is happening at BHRUT with a view to having the misleading statement of 17th July taken down and an apology made by the BHRUT board for misleading the public.
I look forward to your reply.
Regards
Andy Walker
1) BHRUT press release of 17 July 2019 The A&E unit at King George Hospital
cannot be taken seriously as BHRUT hid their December 2016 decision from the public. It was only after campaign to get the bid published was a partial copy published in April 2019.
d - The sentence:
“However, throughout this process we have been clear that the Emergency Department at King George Hospital (KGH) is safe and that there is a need for such provision both now and into the future.”
Is risible in light of BHRUT hiding the fact they intend to close the type 1 A&E at King George per the £49M bid for a type 2 facility at KGH to replace the exisitng type 1 . The existing clinical strategy is clear King George A&E type 1 is to close.
e – The sentence
“The A&E at KGH will continue to be a consultant-led service, open 24 hours a day, with full resuscitation facilities and designated accommodation for the reception of accident and emergency patients (currently known as a Type 1 A&E department).”
misses the words “for all ages” after emergency patients for it to be a type 1 guarantee. The guarantee provided here is merely for a type 2 unit for the elderly.
BHRUT use language very carefully, they initially denied there was a ambulatory care unit on the King George site. It was only when I sent the management a photo of the sign saying the unit existed did BHRUT qualify amend their statement to say there was only an ambulatory care unit, but only one for the elderly see HERE
f - The sentence:
“We have never suggested otherwise.”
Is nonsensical, BHRUT agreed a plan to close the type 1 A&E at King George in 2016. Not only that, the £49M bid document provide a detailed plan to close the type 1 facility, it states the plan has been partially implemented! BHRUT managers have been deceiving the public, patents and elected representatives about their plans for years and I look to you to stop this charade.
g- The sentence:
"We are concerned that ongoing false rumours about the future of the A&E unit at King George Hospital could have an adverse impact on our efforts to recruit and retain vital frontline staff and will worry our residents unnecessarily."
Is a nasty smear and brings BHRUT managers into further disrepute. The latest NHS A&E statistics show BHRUT among the worst performers for type 1 A&E performance. The reason for this is the decision to close 160 beds and their supporting staff set out at page 66 of Redbridge Council report into King George & Queens of February 2018 which was chaired by Wes Streeting MP. This significant reduction in capacity is the cause of the decline of BHRUT A&E performance, not the efforts of campaigners who say BHRUT needs more resources.
For these reasons I request you look into what is happening at BHRUT with a view to having the misleading statement of 17th July taken down and an apology made by the BHRUT board for misleading the public.
I look forward to your reply.
Regards
Andy Walker
1) BHRUT press release of 17 July 2019 The A&E unit at King George Hospital
For the past three months we have been examining what Queen’s Hospital in Romford and King George Hospital in Ilford will look like in the future as part of developing a new clinical strategy. This is an exciting opportunity for us to think creatively about how we provide the best possible services for local people across the NHS while also recognising the key role of our partners, including our councils. We want to make sure we are thinking about solutions which will stand the test of time. We accept that more change is inevitable, and rightly so. We will share our initial ideas with our staff, local people, communities, partners and stakeholders to test our thinking and shape the final clinical strategy. We must remain open and flexible to a range of solutions and options to make the right decisions for the people we serve.
However, throughout this process we have been clear that the Emergency Department at King George Hospital (KGH) is safe and that there is a need for such provision both now and into the future.
The A&E at KGH will continue to be a consultant-led service, open 24 hours a day, with full resuscitation facilities and designated accommodation for the reception of accident and emergency patients (currently known as a Type 1 A&E department).
We have never suggested otherwise. We are concerned that ongoing false rumours about the future of the A&E unit at King George Hospital could have an adverse impact on our efforts to recruit and retain vital frontline staff and will worry our residents unnecessarily.
Chris Bown Interim Chief Executive Barking Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (BHRUT)
Ceri Jacob Managing Director Barking and Dagenham, Havering and Redbridge CCGs (BHR CCGs) (my emphasis)
2 Keith Prince in Recorder
3 BHRUT reply to Keith
4- Kings Fund in A&E definitions
* Type 1 departments are what most people might traditionally think of as an A&E service. They are major emergency departments that provide a consultant-led 24-hour service with full facilities for resuscitating patients, for example patients in cardiac arrest. Some type 1 departments are located with major trauma centres or specialist emergency hospitals and deal with patients who have highly complex or acute conditions. Type 1 departments account for the majority of attendances (68 per cent in 2016/17) over four hours in A&E.
Type 2 departments are consultant-led facilities but for single specialties, for example, dedicated to treating only eye conditions or only dental problems.
Type 3 departments treat minor injuries and illnesses, such as stomach aches, cuts and bruises, some fractures and lacerations, and infections or rashes. Type 3 departments, which can be routinely accessed without an appointment, include minor injury units and walk-in centres.
However, throughout this process we have been clear that the Emergency Department at King George Hospital (KGH) is safe and that there is a need for such provision both now and into the future.
The A&E at KGH will continue to be a consultant-led service, open 24 hours a day, with full resuscitation facilities and designated accommodation for the reception of accident and emergency patients (currently known as a Type 1 A&E department).
We have never suggested otherwise. We are concerned that ongoing false rumours about the future of the A&E unit at King George Hospital could have an adverse impact on our efforts to recruit and retain vital frontline staff and will worry our residents unnecessarily.
Chris Bown Interim Chief Executive Barking Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (BHRUT)
Ceri Jacob Managing Director Barking and Dagenham, Havering and Redbridge CCGs (BHR CCGs) (my emphasis)
2 Keith Prince in Recorder
3 BHRUT reply to Keith
4- Kings Fund in A&E definitions
* Type 1 departments are what most people might traditionally think of as an A&E service. They are major emergency departments that provide a consultant-led 24-hour service with full facilities for resuscitating patients, for example patients in cardiac arrest. Some type 1 departments are located with major trauma centres or specialist emergency hospitals and deal with patients who have highly complex or acute conditions. Type 1 departments account for the majority of attendances (68 per cent in 2016/17) over four hours in A&E.
Type 2 departments are consultant-led facilities but for single specialties, for example, dedicated to treating only eye conditions or only dental problems.
Type 3 departments treat minor injuries and illnesses, such as stomach aches, cuts and bruises, some fractures and lacerations, and infections or rashes. Type 3 departments, which can be routinely accessed without an appointment, include minor injury units and walk-in centres.
No comments:
Post a Comment