Please activate cookies in order to turn autoplay off

Comment

GPs at the heart of the new NHS

The new government's health reforms signal radical surgery for UK healthcare system says Ken Hesketh

  • Public,
Ken Hesketh
Ken Hesketh, chief executive of Benenden Healthcare Society. Photograph: Anna Gordon

The health white paper published earlier this month, Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS, put flesh on the bone of the government's stated intention "to increase democratic participation in the NHS with the aim of making it more accountable to the patients that it serves."

That is, it sets out the government's aim to hand over £80bn of NHS funding to GPs to buy care for patients in their area, with the 157 primary care trusts (PCTs) and 10 Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) to be abolished by 2013.

It will mean "management costs" contained in these tiers will be cut by almost half and GPs could sub-contract work to private companies.

The government's stated objectives with its reforms are to cut waste and bureaucracy, ensure more money gets to the front line of patient care, and standards are driven up.

Although the NHS budget is "ring-fenced" by the government and will be spared cuts to reduce the public sector deficit, indeed the government wants to increase its funding above inflation for every year of this Parliament, the Department of Health (DoH) is still tasked with finding efficiency savings of £20bn this year.

Cameronian Conservatism

In order to balance these objectives, the DoH is seeking to bring in a number of new working practices that combine traditional Conservative thinking on markets, choice and competition with Liberal Democrat and Cameronian Conservatism beliefs of pushing democracy down to a more local level rather than the "top down" target-driven approach of the last government.

The government also wishes to give every patient the power to choose any healthcare provider that meets NHS standards, with NHS prices.

This encompasses independent, voluntary and community sector providers.

Cameron and Clegg are attempting to square the circle of keeping what is currently best about the NHS while at the same time transferring power downwards, increasing the number of providers and increasing efficiency.

The coalition is seeking to give patients more influence over decisions about their care, offering them the right to choose the GP they want regardless of where they live; rate hospitals and clinical staff according to the quality of care received; and take charge of their own health records.

At the same time, it wants to empower NHS staff through increased responsibility and greater control over how the services they run are managed and budgeted.

This increased power for patients was emphasised in the recent white paper: the patient is to be put at the centre of the health service and the sound bite "no decision about me, without me" is used as a theme throughout.

A new patient champion organisation called HealthWatch will also be established as part of the new super healthcare regulator, the Care Quality Commission.

With this in mind the NHS and other healthcare providers must prepare for a new system that welcomes transparency and accountability of efficiency and quality of services and seeks to ensure patient care does improve as a result of these changes.

The changes outlined in the white paper are also likely to mean streamlining of existing administration protocols within the healthcare system, with expectations that many processes will become digitalised and comparative information (by cost, convenience and quality levels) readily available online.

One of the objectives in this sphere is to make it easier for patients to download their records to share with healthcare organisations of their choice and allow doctors and patients to communicate via email.

This was already starting to happen but the white paper may have the effect of speeding up this process.

Public's expectations

This shake up of the NHS, based upon the principles of consumer choice, fits with the general public's expectations, as it is used to choosing its service providers based upon the quality of product and customer service on offer. Such criteria are currently routinely used by the consumers when choosing banking; insurance and utility service providers.

Such principles are applicable to health and wider care services but do represent a cultural shift from an existing, one size fits all, supplier mind set.

In the first authoritative poll since the General Election, Benenden Healthcare examined people's opinions on the suggested healthcare reforms, and found that there is a strong public appetite for more choice, more information and more control.

Change is inevitable as technological and scientific advances are being made all the time. The old structures, although delivering, on the whole, good care for patients, are nonetheless creaking under the strain of demand and technological change.

What is clear is that patients and frontline staff will need to recognise and accept that reform is on the way.

The next few years could see the largest shake up in the NHS since its creation in 1948. We must work together to ensure that this evolution of the NHS does not undermine its core purpose – to provide universal and quality healthcare for everyone free at the point of need.

• A full version of Benenden Healthcare's report into public findings on the Government's key health policy proposals is available here www.benenden.org.uk/healthpollfindings. NB this poll was conducted BEFORE the publication of the NHS White Paper

Ken Hesketh, is chief executive of Benenden Healthcare Society


Your IP address will be logged

Comments in chronological order

Comments are now closed for this entry.
  • This symbol indicates that that person is Public's staffStaff
  • iamwhoiam2

    24 Jul 2010, 10:19AM

    This shake up of the NHS, based upon the principles of consumer choice, fits with the general public's expectations, as it is used to choosing its service providers based upon the quality of product and customer service on offer. Such criteria are currently routinely used by the consumers when choosing banking; insurance and utility service providers.

    Such principles are applicable to health and wider care services but do represent a cultural shift from an existing, one size fits all, supplier mind set.

    Not true ... such principles are not applicable to health and wider care services.

    Choice is not applicable to all services, especially ones with high variation and that involve human beings. In the supermarket choosing between Tin A and Tin B is fine and acceptable.

    Choosing between hospital A & hospital B or Doctor A & Doctor B or Drug A & Drug B is dumb and dangerous.

    As a patient trying to obtain service I want to be made better as quickly as possible at a place that is close to me. I would not have a single clue how to choose between A or B.

    There is currently a move to try and justify choice by creating a huge measurement system. The cost is immeasurable the damage yet to be measured

  • raye158

    24 Jul 2010, 3:51PM

    Regarding:
    Cares of Life- South London and Maudsley (slam) Hospital in relation to Elizabeth/Mary Ward in Putney.

    Would like to say that I after doing my undercover report on SLAM, they are not as well grounded on the cures of mental health as they claims to be. Their views on a range of issues including black history and mental health of black patients are backwards, inclining towards African believes and thus are subjective as their claims are not replicable and typical of the black community in Britain. Particularly their views that "vociferously challenge the assumption that smoking cannabis causes schizophrenia in black men". Thorough research has shown that for instance in indigenous cultures like New Zealand’s kiwi omen auguration culture, smoking drugs like cannabis is used to subdue into a state of hallucination as part of the ritual in the contact of the spirit world. Also, including the fact that Opium poppy plant grown in Afghanistan serves as Morphine (10 deci of Opium poppy) to treat pain (pain relief) in cancerous cells of patients and also as Heroine (90 deci) to both ‘Crimes of the Street’ and ‘Crimes of the Suite’ (100 deci would be death).

    Also they claim (on blackbritain.co.uk) that "Black children picked pink toys because that is what they believed is a better colour to be, not black" is subjective and controversial. Black little girls in Britain would buy pink dolls because that is what is available on the market or because of the effectiveness of advertising for pink dolls. His claims cannot be replicated in other Western Societies like America where brown dolls are popularised alongside pink dolls.

    However, Cares of Life and SLAM are currently under investigation in the mental health hospital ward they run for neglecting the health of his patients, for bashing risk assessment (tick boxes of risk of patient to themselves and others) over personal need (clinical nursing health care needs) including adequate cleaner wards and adequate patient health care package plan. The powerless and vulnerable patients are not given their mandatory weekly ward round appointments, their care is not reviewed, monitored and noisy patients or complaining patients are give SATAN’S “BLUE PILL” (SATAN’S DEATH ‘BLUE PILL’ ; Blue Pill that causes death ; THAT exacerabates acute: brain dead; incontinence; bed wetting; drowsiness/sleepiness; concussion including missing of meal times, forgetfulness and superfluous saliva) and drugged over and excessively to keep them quiet without adherence to health regulations and safe drug dosage. Also under covert investigation, patients are pressured into changing their medication for a stronger medication if patients complain of serious side affects on their current medication / Depo, including withdrawal symptons: vomiting, shakes, shivering, tremor, saliva, body organ problems, paralysis, dizziness, passing-out, speech hindrance and zombie-like behaviour to name but a few.

    Through observation and contact with Cares of Life and SLAM, staff do not wear uniform and have heavy jewellery which does not form the ethos of care ethics because it makes them abuse their power in such a way that they see black patients as inferior to themself and is venting is frustration at the fact that as Clinical Staff that have to deal mostly with black patients who have mental health problems, which makes them feel that this negative black image does not give them a sense of job worthiness seen as most of them are underqualified and feel they cannot achieve a better career prospect for themselves in modern Britain and seems as if the job of looking after the welfare of mentally ill staff is to pay the bills.

    If HRH Prince William Wales was patron to SLAM services it may raise recognition of the need for more clinical health care and personal need over clinical risk assessment tick boxes. Seeing as Prince William has understanding of mental health from his work with the Helicopter Drugs Unit and his work with the Homeless Charity’s Shelter and Centre Point inlcluding the Blackfriars Street Sleeping Homeless Project with Jeff Hubbard.

Comments are now closed for this entry.

Comments

Sorry, commenting is not available at this time. Please try again later.

  • Public - newsletter