Leeds children's heart unit camapigners win in court
Looks like the mandarins have cocked up again.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-21697947
Campaigners trying to keep child heart surgery in Leeds have won a legal challenge.
A judicial review was brought at the High Court in London last month by the Save our Surgery group (SOS) over an NHS decision to stop the operations.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-21697947
0
Comments
To many accountants are interfering with medical matters
Indeed all of the people affected by this review agreed with the principle reducing the number of sites at which children's heart surgery is carried out. They simply disagree that 'their' hospital should be one of the ones to lose the service. In this case the Leeds campaigners think Newcastle should be the site closed, not Leeds.
It isn't about money as the change will likely cost more than it saves. It's about improving quality. The disgrace is that twenty years after the Bristol Heart Scandal and 10 years on from the independent inquiry into the scandal, we still have hospitals putting empire building before patients.
Probably one of the only times I'll agree with you.
A bit like the German system system.They have 26 heart facilities for children and they are tip top.
A friend of mine attended a regional specialist cancer unit in France and is now cancer free. He saw the same specialist and nurse at every single visit and was always seen on time.The hospital was spotlessly clean and the pre-op care and post- op care were excellent.
wonders never cease
But not at the cost of the Freeman hospital which is one of the best in the country.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21972187
So maybe the children would be better going to Newcastle
24 hours after — . http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-21952379
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21851658
They are trying to Americanise the nhs.
Is it me, or is that 100% full of shit?
The timing is a bit suspect don't you think, less than 24 hours after a court decision to keep Leeds open "OH HAI, WE'RE SHUTTING YOU DOWN ANYWAY TO INVESTIGATE "ANOMALIES"
Why were the questions about mortality rate not taken into account when reviewing whether to keep Leeds open in the first place?
The whole thing is very about this fishy imo...logically Leeds is far more central than Newcastle and serves a far bigger number of people and is more accessible from other parks of England in general, surely it'd make more sense to take the medicial facilities to the patients rather than the other way around?
My son was treated at Leeds HDU for Kawasaki's disease so i have quite a lot of interest in this :P
I agree with you. There is something extremely fishy about this. No claims of anything wrong at Leeds until parents won their court case to keep it open.
Not true, there has been ongoing enquiry into mortality rates there which is not yet complete. The mortality rate there is double the national average and children that survive are more likely to have learning difficulties and other permanent ongoing medical issues. The decision was made after several calls from surgeons and a good thing too.
If I had a child needing heart surgery I would avoid Leeds at all costs. Far better to travel to a hospital with a good reputation than go to the local one just for convenience of travel.
Pity the same immediate decisiveness was not shown in the Staffordshire case.
This issue was covered at length in the Today programme this morning.
I stand by what i said. This looks very suspicious.
http://gregmulholland.org/en/article/2013/676263/mulholland-demands-resignation-of-nhs-boss-after-surgery-at-leeds-children-s-heart-unit-suspended-in-suspicious-circumstances
Conspiracy theorists always avoid the facts and rely on gossip and blogs by people with vested interests.
I preferred the explanation given on the Today programme.
It does seem very suspicious timing, just as Abu Qatada being arrested for breaking bail conditions a couple of days before a hearing was. Then we have the retrospective law changing after defeat for smith on workfare and government attempts to block court appeals for a judicial review over the bedroom tax. It all smacks of a government determined to do as it pleases, despite the laws of the land. A government that operates like that is a very dangerous government indeed.
The mainstream media give you the information they want you to know, just as politicians do. You need to look outside of that to find out the things they don't want you to know.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/an-absolute-scandal-mp-calls-for-top-doctors-resignation-over-suspension-of-surgery-at-leeds-general-infirmary-childrens-heart-unit-8554178.html
Look like this goverment are going to do everything as if its a dictatorship, smell big trouble building up between goverment, and the courts and judges
and on the basis of some anonymous representations from surgeons outside Leeds.
That bit concerns me. There is a head of steam building that all surgeons, consultants, doctors want this centralised treatment scheme but it's not really the case, certainly not from the people I've spoken to. There have also been reports in the media saying that a select few are being taken notice of and genuine concerns are being dismissed. In an ideal world, what surgeon wouldn't want state of the art facilities and regular operations? That is also very much tailor made for privatisation as an entity in itself.
Less coverage means more travel, more cost for patients and increased likelihood of problems, be it unable to be there on time/on the day of admittance or in lack of immediate localised care. Beware those that advocate the fewer, centralised treatment centres, it's another faux privatisation set up within the NHS, just like the internal market. Nothing wrong with these centres but not at the expense of availability of care and treatment elsewhere.
The principle of the review IS broadly accepted by all involved - whether units, professional bodies or support charities. All agree that the minimum standard for a unit should be 4 surgeons (i.e. enough to provide 24/7 specialist care) with a caseload of 400 - preferably 500 - operations a year.
The only area of dispute is that everyone thinks that THEIR unit should be saved and someone's else closed instead. The Leed's Save our Surgery campaign is open about the fact that they think Newcastle Freeman should close instead of Leeds. NIMBYism in other words.
The evidence is clear: fewer, specialised centres deliver much better care than distributed, inexperienced 'jack-of-all-trades' units - be it trauma, stroke, transplant surgey, battlefield medicine, neurosurgery, cardiac surgery or any other specialty with high complexity and low patient population. I've challenged you before to provide clinical evidence showing otherwise - a link to a peer reviewed article, or the BMJ or the Lancet would suffice - and I'll ask again: What is your source?
As for your unscientific "beware..", it is worst kind of scaremongering: on a par with religious demagogues in third world countries who spread falsehoods about vaccination.