This is from the Guardian back in 2012, my thanks to NHS forYes for pointing this out. This is how one of the contributors views the differences between NHS Scotland and the NHS in England. Dr Lucy Reynolds a research fellow at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical medicine. Those acquainted with the Health and Social Care Act know that it isnt written to improve service delivery, but to provide profit streams for investors, insurers and hospital chains. The responsibility of NHS staff is to protect patients interests, because Healthwatch England lacks teeth. They can do that by escalating patient concerns through the system, and by keeping publishable records to document soaring costs and deterioration of care within the new system. The leaked transition risk register gave odds of four to one that dismantling the current management structures and controls [causes] more failures. It notes that mitigating actions are needed but lacking. As the defects of this McNHS reform manifest, we should consider the Scottish mutual model developed since 2004, when statistics showed that market-based arrangements cost more. They removed the Westminster-mandated purchaser/provider split and set up 14 regional health boards to administer a collaborative, affordable integrated health system. It was subsequently found that the Scottish mutual NHS has outperformed the partially-marketised English NHS on the index indicator of health service quality, infant mortality and on key efficiency measures including waiting lists and patient satisfaction. Cheerleaders for liberating the NHS insist that the current reforms should proceed. The risk register confirms that the sooner we follow the more efficient path of our northern neighbours, the better for our health and wealth.
Posted on: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 11:15:13 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015