Jump to content

Search the hub

Showing results for tags 'England'.


More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Start to type the tag you want to use, then select from the list.

  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • All
    • Commissioning, service provision and innovation in health and care
    • Coronavirus (COVID-19)
    • Culture
    • Digital health and care service provision
    • Improving patient safety
    • Investigations, risk management and legal issues
    • Leadership for patient safety
    • Organisations linked to patient safety (UK and beyond)
    • Patient engagement
    • Patient safety in health and care
    • Patient Safety Learning
    • Professionalising patient safety
    • Research, data and insight
    • Miscellaneous

Categories

  • Commissioning, service provision and innovation in health and care
    • Commissioning and funding patient safety
    • Health records and plans
    • Innovation programmes in health and care
    • Climate change/sustainability
  • Coronavirus (COVID-19)
    • Blogs
    • Data, research and statistics
    • Frontline insights during the pandemic
    • Good practice and useful resources
    • Guidance
    • Mental health
    • Exit strategies
    • Patient recovery
    • Questions around Government governance
  • Culture
    • Bullying and fear
    • Good practice
    • Occupational health and safety
    • Safety culture programmes
    • Second victim
    • Speak Up Guardians
    • Staff safety
    • Whistle blowing
  • Digital health and care service provision
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • Apps for health and care
    • Teleservices
    • Other health and care software
    • Digital health regulatory bodies/standards/guidance
  • Improving patient safety
    • Clinical governance and audits
    • Design for safety
    • Disasters averted/near misses
    • Equipment and facilities
    • Error traps
    • Health inequalities
    • Human factors (improving human performance in care delivery)
    • Improving systems of care
    • Implementation of improvements
    • International development and humanitarian
    • Patient Safety Alerts
    • Safety stories
    • Stories from the front line
    • Transformative Simulation
    • Workforce and resources
  • Investigations, risk management and legal issues
    • Investigations and complaints
    • Risk management and legal issues
  • Leadership for patient safety
    • Business case for patient safety
    • Boards
    • Clinical leadership
    • Exec teams
    • Inquiries
    • International reports
    • National/Governmental
    • Patient Safety Commissioner
    • Quality and safety reports
    • Techniques
    • Other
  • Organisations linked to patient safety (UK and beyond)
    • Government and ALB direction and guidance
    • International patient safety
    • Regulators and their regulations
  • Patient engagement
    • Consent and privacy
    • Harmed care patient pathways/post-incident pathways
    • How to engage for patient safety
    • Keeping patients safe
    • Patient-centred care
    • Patient Safety Partners
    • Patient stories
  • Patient safety in health and care
    • Care settings
    • Conditions
    • Diagnosis
    • High risk areas
    • Learning disabilities
    • Medication
    • Mental health
    • Men's health
    • Patient management
    • Social care
    • Transitions of care
    • Women's health
  • Patient Safety Learning
    • Patient Safety Learning documents
    • Patient Safety Standards
    • 2-minute Tuesdays
    • Patient Safety Learning Annual Conference 2019
    • Patient Safety Learning Annual Conference 2018
    • Patient Safety Learning Awards 2019
    • Patient Safety Learning Interviews
    • Patient Safety Learning webinars
  • Professionalising patient safety
    • Accreditation for patient safety
    • Competency framework
    • Medical students
    • Patient safety standards
    • Training & education
  • Research, data and insight
  • Miscellaneous

News

  • News

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start
    End

Last updated

  • Start
    End

Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


First name


Last name


Country


About me


Organisation


Role

Found 206 results
  1. News Article
    Hundreds of children across England are set to benefit from a new drug which has been approved for rollout on the NHS to treat a severe muscle-wasting condition. Givinostat is expected to enable eligible patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy to maintain their mobility for longer. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence confirmed the drug's availability after its manufacturer reached a commercial agreement with NHS England. This decision marks a significant step for families affected by the rare genetic disorder. While campaigners welcomed the long-awaited approval, they highlighted the "agonising" two-year process, during which many families were left without access to the drug as their child's condition continued to deteriorate. Read more here. Source: The Independent, 8 May 2026
  2. Content Article
    Sling the Mesh are taking their fight to 10 Downing Street, urging the Prime Minister to commit to a long‑overdue compensation scheme for women harmed by pelvic mesh – and set out a clear timeframe and firm dates for action. The letter they are handing in to Sir Kier Starmer is published below. Sling the Mesh are calling on English Parliament to take the lead by setting out a robust financial redress framework that the devolved nations can follow.
  3. News Article
    Children in England are facing "some of the worst child health outcomes in Europe," prompting MPs to demand an "urgent" rebuilding of the health visiting workforce. A new report from the House of Commons Health and Social Care Committee has issued a stark warning, highlighting rising obesity levels and "uneven" vaccination coverage among infants. The cross-party group scrutinised the critical "first 1,000 days" of a child's life, from conception to age two, concluding that government action is imperative to improve national child health. Committee members urged ministers to expand pledges on Family Hubs, ensuring these vital support centres are accessible in every community. Crucially, they called for an immediate effort to "urgently rebuild the health visiting workforce," which has seen a significant 43% reduction since 2015. This has resulted in a shortfall of 5,000 posts, with remaining staff managing “dangerously high” caseloads, the report states. The report also calls for the target of giving 95% of children their routine childhood immunisations to be reinstated in the NHS. “The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health says the UK has some of the worst health outcomes for young children in Europe. This should be a source of shame. “Over the last two decades we have seen a hollowing out of health services for infants – the Family Hubs programme still barely touches the sides of what was once provided by Sure Start centres before they were forced to close." Read full story Source: The Independent, 22 January 2026
  4. News Article
    Launched on International Men’s Day, the first Men’s Health Strategy for England is being published today. The plan sets out comprehensive action to tackle the physical and mental health challenges men and boys face every day. Suicide is one of the biggest killers of men under 50 and three quarters of all suicides are men. As part of this plan, the Government will invest £3.6 million over the next three years in suicide prevention projects for middle-aged men in local communities across areas of England where men are at most risk of taking their own lives, including some of the most deprived areas in the country. This comes on top of expanding mental health teams in schools to ensure an additional 900,000 pupils have access to support by April 2026. The focus on suicide prevention includes a partnership on the Premier League’s Together Against Suicide initiative with the Samaritans, which looks to help tackle the stigma around men’s mental health and embed health messaging into the matchday experience. Men with prostate cancer will also benefit from improved care through the strategy, including the development of home prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing for those being monitored for the disease. From 2027, subject to clinical approval, men diagnosed with prostate cancer which is being actively monitored or treated – will be able to order and complete PSA blood tests at home, or book an in-person blood test, locally, via the NHS App.  Other key commitments in the Men’s Health Strategy include: Investing £3 million into community-based men’s health programmes, designed to reach those most at risk and least likely to engage with traditional services Men’s health training for healthcare professionals through new e-learning modules and resources Workplace health pilots with EDF Energy through the Keep Britain Working Vanguard Programme to support male workers in male-dominated industries Enhanced lung disease support for former miners, with increased investment in the Respiratory Pathways Transformation Fund in areas with significant former mining communities Funding research to help prevent, diagnose, treat and manage the major male killers and causes of unhealthy life years in men A £200,000 trial of new brief interventions to target the rise in cocaine and alcohol-related CVD deaths, particularly among older men Read full article. Source: Department of Health and Social Care (19 November 2025)
  5. News Article
    The national maternity safety inquiry launched by the Government in June this year will “not investigate failing trusts or apportion blame”, its leader has said – drawing criticism from campaigning families. In a private briefing, Baroness Valerie Amos told the 12 trusts involved in the review that “she’s not investigating ‘failing’ trusts and she’s not in the business of apportioning blame”, according to one of the trusts involved. This is despite Health and Social Care Secretary Wes Steeting Streeting alluding to “failures in the system” when launching the review in June. The terms of reference for the review also make repeated promises of “accountability”, including “help[ing] bereaved and harmed families to receive justice and accountability in the future”. Read full article (paywalled). Source: Health Service Journal, 17 November 2025
  6. Content Article
    The report analyses spending, demand, staffing and performance across the NHS, specifically in relation to hospitals and general practice. It is intended to provide a comprehensive stocktake to date of the inheritance left by the previous Conservative government and the decisions made since the Labour Party came to power in the UK in 2024. Key findings General practice There are 2,219 more salaried GPs* in September 2025 than in June 2024 (+20.5%). That monthly growth is almost 6x faster than Conservative governments achieved between 2015 and 2019. Between June 2024 and September 2025, the number of GP partners declined by 4.1% – and by 17.0% among partners under the age of 40. Though there are more GPs overall, the number of GP appointments has flatlined – meaning the number per GP was 2.7% lower in the 12 months to September 2025 compared to 2019. A record 8.6% of appointments in September 2025 were online, compared to just 0.7% in April 2023. But this is not widespread: three in 10 practices carried out no online appointments in the year to September 2025 (29.8%). Hospitals Health spending growth is due to be only slightly higher than under the last Conservative government for the rest of this parliament (at 2.8% per year in real terms compared to 2.7%). 32 of 42 integrated care boards (76%) are forecasting a deficit in 2025/26, up from 18 in 2024/25. The growth of staffing has slowed since the start of 2024. There has been almost no change in the number of non-clinical staff in that time, while clinical staff have increased by 5%. Leaver rates have fallen to record lows (excluding the pandemic), with particularly low rates among consultants. In 2025 the NHS is recruiting more UK than overseas staff – reversing a trend seen between 2021 and the start of 2025, where more recruits came from overseas.
  7. Content Article
    To be authorised for use in the National Health Service (NHS) in England, digital health technologies (DHTs) must meet two mandatory clinical risk management standards, DCB0129 and DCB0160. Meeting these standards is intended to demonstrate that risks from design and use have been assessed and mitigated. NHS organisations must not procure a DHT without DCB0129 assurance and must not deploy one without DCB0160 assurance. Despite legal requirement, no public data exist on how many DHTs are in use in the NHS or how many are assured. This study, published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, aimed to determine the number of DHTs in use in the NHS in England and assess their assurance status against mandated clinical safety standards. Its findings indicated that more than 10,000 DHTs currently in use lack documented assurance against clinical safety standards, and that in a typical NHS trust, 3 out of 4 digital tools influencing patient care do not demonstrate compliance with minimum legal or clinical safety requirements.
  8. News Article
    The NHS waiting list in England has fallen after three months of consecutive rises. At the end of September, it stood at 7.39 million, down from 7.41 million the month before. Of those waiting, 61.8% of patients had been waiting less than 18 weeks. That is the best performance for more than two years, but is well below the target of 92%, which the government has promised it will hit by the end of the parliament. The NHS also released figures showing more than one million people came forward for flu jabs in the past week after a vaccination "SOS" was issued last week amid the early rise in flu cases this year. Read full article. Source: BBC News, 13 November 2025
  9. Content Article
    In this annual report for 2023/24, Healthwatch England outlines how the public’s stories have changed care for the better, and the work they are doing to make sure that the health and social care system puts patients at its very heart. Healthwatch England is a statutory committee of the Care Quality Commission (CQC). Its main functions are to: provide leadership, guidance, support to local Healthwatch organisations; escalate concerns about health and social care services to CQC; and advise Government, NHS England and local authorities about the quality of services.
  10. Content Article
    On Wednesday 15 October 2024, the Department of Health and Social Care announced an independent review of patient safety across the health and care landscape in England. This blog sets out Patient Safety Learning’s response to this announcement. Today the Government has published the terms of reference for a review of patient safety across the health and care landscape. This review will: “… assess whether the current range and combination of organisations delivers effective leadership, listening, learning (including investigations and their recommendations) and regulation to the health and care systems in relation to patient and user safety (and to what extent they focus on the other domains of quality).”[1] This follows on from the publication of Dr Penny Dash’s latest report highlighting significant failings at the Care Quality Commission (CQC), the independent regulator of care providers.[2] The main focus of the review will be on the following organisations: CQC – including the Maternity and Newborn Safety Investigations programme National Guardian’s Office Healthwatch England and the Local Healthwatch network Health Services Safety Investigation Body (HSSIB) Patient Safety Commissioner for England NHS Resolution (patient safety-related learning functions only, not clinical negligence functions). The review will focus on how these bodies work together, with the findings feeding into the government's 10-year plan for the NHS, expected to be published in the spring next year. Patient Safety Learning welcomes this announcement and sets out some initial reflections on this below. A fragmented landscape The landscape of organisations with patient safety roles and responsibilities is fragmented and lacks coordination. This makes it often ill-suited to tackling complex systemic challenges to patient safety. This is an issue we highlighted in our report last year, The elephant in the room: Patient safety and Integrated Care Systems.[3] Therefore, we welcome any steps to promote cross-organisational working and coordination between regulators, ultimately with the aim of reducing avoidable harm. Figure 1: Patient safety environment in England The need to review roles and remits of patient safety organisations in England is not a new issue. The CQC itself referred to this as early as 2018, in their report Opening the door to change: NHS safety culture and the need for transformation.[4] This was also highlighted in 2020 by the Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety (IMMDS) Review. Chaired by Baroness Julia Cumberlege, this looked at the harmful side effects of medicines and medical devices and how to respond to them more quickly and effectively in the future. It stated that: “We have found that the healthcare system – in which I include the NHS, private providers, the regulators and professional bodies, pharmaceutical and device manufacturers, and policymakers – is disjointed, siloed, unresponsive and defensive. It does not adequately recognise that patients are its raison d’etre. It has failed to listen to their concerns and when, belatedly, it has decided to act it has too often moved glacially.”[5] Again this was raised last year by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. In their report, Broken trust: making patient safety more than just a promise, they stated that: “… political leaders have created a confusing landscape of organisations, often in knee-jerk rection to patient safety crisis points. HSIB, the Patient Safety Commissioner, PHSO, NHS England, NHS Resolution and more than a dozen different health and care regulators all play important roles in patient safety. But there are significant overlaps in functions, which create uncertainty about who is responsible for what. This means patient safety voice and leadership are fractured. This is not due to a lack of dedication and professionalism from those tasked with championing patient safety. The problem is structural.”[6] Patient perspective An overly complex system of regulation and oversight that cannot tackle underlying patient safety problems ultimately has a very real human cost. The persistence of avoidable harm, and every avoidable death and disability that accompanies this, is an unnecessary tragedy for patients, families and healthcare professionals. At Patient Safety Learning, we believe that patients should be engaged for safety at the point of care, if things go wrong, in improving services, advocating for changes and in holding the system to account. We identify this as one of our six foundations of safer care in our report, A Blueprint for Action.[7] This is also one of the seven strategic objectives in the WHO Global Patient Safety Action Plan, which states that: “Patients, families and other informal caregivers bring insights from their experiences of care that cannot be substituted or replicated by clinicians, managers or researchers. This is especially so for those who have suffered harm.”[8] We would therefore stress the importance that this new review must feature a clear commitment to including and involving patients as part of the process. This should not be a top-down exercise without patient and public input. Safety culture We believe that we need a transformation in the health and care system’s approach to patient safety. Fundamental to this is patient safety not being seen as another priority, which in practice will be weighed (and inevitably traded-off) against other priorities, but as a core purpose of health and care. This will require a cultural shift in health and care in the UK. There remains a significant gap between what organisation leaders say about creating a patient safety culture in the NHS and what is done in practice. We see plentiful evidence of this in inquiries into unsafe care, whistleblower testimonies and staff survey results. This was an issue we examined in greater detail earlier this year in our report, We are not getting safer: Patient Safety and the NHS staff survey results.[9] In this context, we believe it would be beneficial if the review also considers the role of national leadership organisations in actively contributing and creating a just and fair culture in health and care. Safety Management System There is a growing debate in patient safety about the possible benefits that healthcare may gain from moving towards a Safety Management System (SMS) approach. SMSs are an organised approach to managing safety which are widely used in different industries. An SMS approach is used to: help enable proactive assessments of risks specify how risks should be managed set clear lines of accountability and responsibility in addressing risks. In considering the application of SMSs to UK healthcare, HSSIB in October 2023 published a report, Safety management system: an introduction for healthcare.[10] This identified the requirements for effective SMSs, how these are used in other safety critical industries and considers the potential of application of this approach in healthcare. A country-wide SMS would have the potential to provide a more structured and joined up approach to patient safety strategies, involving all the national bodies. Patient Safety Learning believes that integral to this is a standards-based framework to ensure safe, quality patient care is consistently delivered.[11] A patient safety standards framework helps organisations understand ‘what good looks like’ for patient safety, understand where more action is needed for improvement, with clearly defined safety aims and goals. Such a framework will enable organisations and regulators to demonstrate a risk-based approach to patient safety and evidence achievement, can provide assurance that patient safety sits at the organisation’s core, improves performance through increased effectiveness, and enables patients and families, staff, funders and communities to identify and differentiate good safety providers. This is an issue we believe requires serious consideration and we look forward to contributing as part of our submission to this review. References Department of Health and Social Car. Review of patient safety across the health and care landscape: terms of reference, 15 October 2024. Department of Health and Social Care. Independent report: Review into the operational effectiveness of the Care Quality Commission, 15 October 2024. Patent Safety Learning. The elephant in the room: Patient safety and integrated care systems, 11 July 2023. CQC. Opening the door to change: NHS safety culture and the need for transformation, December 2018. The IMMDS Review. First Do No Harm: The report of the Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review, 8 July 2020. PHSO. Broken trust: making patient safety more than just a promise, 29 June 2023. Patient Safety Learning. The Patient-Safe Future: A Blueprint For Action, 2019. WHO. Global Patient Safety Action Plan 2021-2030, 3 August 2021. Patient Safety Learning. We are not getting safer: Patient safety and the NHS staff survey results, 26 March 2024. Health Services Safety Investigations Body. Safety management systems: an introduction for healthcare, 18 October 2024. Patient Safety Learning. Standards: What Good Looks Like, Last accessed 15 October 2024.
  11. Content Article
    At Patient Safety Learning we often get asked by patients and families who have received poor healthcare what they need to do to make a complaint. Although we cannot get directly involved in individual cases, we have put together a simple guides on the steps you can take if you need to make a complaint about NHS care in England. We also have the following guides: How do I make a complaint about my NHS care Northern Ireland: a simple guide for patients and families How do I make a complaint about my NHS care in Scotland: a simple guide for patients and families How do I make a complaint about my NHS care in Wales: a simple guide for patients and families How do I make a complaint about my private care: a simple guide for patients and families How do I make a complaint: Sources of help and advice If you are a healthcare professional looking at these pages, the NHS Complaint Standards, model complaint handling procedure and good complaint handling guides set out how organisations providing NHS services should approach complaint handling. They apply to all NHS organisations in England and independent healthcare providers who deliver NHS-funded care. You have the right to make a complaint about any aspect of NHS care, treatment or service. Every organisation that provides an NHS service in England must have their own complaints procedure. You can usually find information about how to complain in waiting rooms, at reception, on the organisation’s website or by asking a member of staff. Here are the steps to take if you would like to make a complaint. More information on each step is given below. Step 1: Informal complaint Many issues can be resolved quickly by speaking directly to the staff at the place where you received care or accessed a service. You are under no obligation to make a complaint informally before you make a formal complaint. However, if you believe something has gone wrong with the healthcare provided to you or a loved one, it is almost always best to discuss your concerns with the medical staff as soon as possible, especially if your main concern is to have something urgently put right. Talk to the staff concerned or a manager and explain why you are unhappy. If you prefer, you can contact the Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS) at the organisation and ask them to investigate the matter. Contact your local hospital trust for contact details of their PALS. If your complaint is about a family health service (such as a GP, dentist, optician or pharmacist) you can contact the practice complaints manager. They may be able to settle your complaint straight away. If you are not satisfied with their response, however, you can submit a formal complaint through local resolution procedures—see Step 2. Step 2: Local resolution procedures If you would like your complaint to be dealt with more formally, you should use the NHS complaints procedure. The first stage is local resolution, where the NHS is required to investigate and respond to your complaint. You should make your complaint as soon as possible so that your memory of events is fresh. Your complaint must be made: no later than 12 months after the event(s), or no later than 12 months from when you first became aware of the issues. NHS organisations may consider complaints outside these time limits—for example, if you have a long-term illness or condition. A complaint can be made verbally, in writing or electronically. You can complain: Directly to the provider (such as a the hospital or GP surgery). To your local integrated care board (ICB) for complaints about primary care services (GPs, dentists, opticians or pharmacists) and secondary care (such as hospital care, mental health services, out-of-hours services, NHS 111 and community services like district nursing). Each ICB has its own complaints procedure, which is often displayed on its website. Find your local integrated care board. AvMA (Action against Medical Accidents) has a number of self-help guides that provide clear and straightforward explanations of the procedure and guide you through making a complaint, including a helpful template letter. Under the NHS complaints procedure, you can get: An explanation for what happened. An apology or other statement of regret. Steps to review procedures to avoid similar incidents happening in future. In general, the NHS complaints procedure will not: Offer financial compensation. Address issues of staff discipline, for instance by sacking someone or having them struck off a professional register. If you are not satisfied with the final response to your complaint, you have the right to request an independent review of your complaint by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman—see Step 3. Step 3: Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman If you have tried local resolution and are not happy with the result, or if the investigation has taken over six months, you can ask for an independent review by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (the Ombudsman). You must go through the NHS Complaint (local resolution) stage first—the Ombudsman will not consider your complaint until you do. Although you have a right to request an independent review of your complaint, the Ombudsman is unlikely to agree to a review if it thinks that more should be done to resolve the complaint at local resolution stage. You should try to request a review within 12 months of the incident occurring or when you first became aware that something had gone wrong. If this is not possible, you can ask the Ombudsman to consider your request, particularly if you have a good reason for the delay such as trying to obtain other advice. You can use the Ombudsman’s own forms to submit your complaint if you wish. AvMA also provides further guidance on making a complaint to the Ombudsman. Once the Ombudsman has confirmed its decision, this is the end of the NHS complaints procedure. If you still strongly disagree with the Ombudsman’s decision the only way to challenge it is via judicial review. Step 4: Judicial review Although the NHS complaints procedure finishes with a final decision by the Ombudsman, you may be able to challenge the Ombudsman’s decision by seeking a judicial review. You will need to take legal advice to see if you are eligible. Judicial review is a legal process in which the courts assess whether a public body—in this case the Ombudsman—has reached or failed to reach a decision fairly. The grounds for this can include: There has been an unfair or biased process. This could be that the public body has failed to review evidence presented by one side or hasn’t given a fair hearing on the basis of the written information. The decision is irrational. The most important point about judicial review is that it must be sought very quickly after the decision has been made. You should seek legal advice as quickly as possible if you are considering this route. An application for judicial review should be made as soon as possible and no later than three months after the public body’s decision has been made. The Law Society provides a list of lawyers who specialise in medical matters.
  12. News Article
    Hospitals in England are being offered unlimited bonus payments to remove people they decide do not need treatment from their waiting lists amid warnings that thousands of patients most in need are still facing unacceptable delays. The waiting list for hospital treatment fell for the sixth month in a row in February, according to data published on Thursday. In an attempt to cut waiting lists and free up consultants to see those most in need, NHS trusts have this week been ordered to “validate” their entire waiting list. This will involve reviewing every patient and removing anyone who could be treated elsewhere or does not need an appointment with a specialist. Those whose symptoms have eased or who have already used private healthcare to undergo surgery, for example, will also be removed. Hospitals will receive an “incentive payment” for each patient they remove, and a payment cap of 5% of a trust’s waiting list is being scrapped, according to documents seen by the Guardian. It means there is no limit to the payments NHS trusts could receive for taking patients off their lists. Read full story Source: The Guardian, 10 April 2025
  13. News Article
    National leaders are targeting October 2026 for the abolition of NHS England and consolidation of its functions into the Department of Health and Social Care, according to Health Service Journal. The timeframe is not yet confirmed, and will depend on ministers securing space in the King’s Speech and parliamentary time to progress a health bill. There is also an acceptance that completing the process in 18 months will be challenging. Read full story (paywalled) Source: Health Service Journal, 11 April 2025
  14. News Article
    Two of England’s leading doctors are to oversee a significant review into postgraduate training for newly qualified medics. National Medical Director Professor Sir Stephen Powis and Chief Medical Officer Professor Sir Chris Whitty will lead the review as part of work to address concerns raised by resident doctors (previously known as junior doctors). The review will be based on feedback from current resident doctors and students, locally employed doctors and medical educators, with a series of engagement events around the country starting from this month. The review will cover placement options, the flexibility of training, difficulties with rotas, control and autonomy in training, and the balance between developing specialist knowledge and gaining a broad range of skills. The national listening events in February and March will be followed by a call for evidence in the spring to ensure the widest possible range of views, experiences and ideas are captured. A report on the review’s findings is due to be published in the summer. Read full story Source: NHS England, 19 February 2025
  15. Content Article
    This report by the National Audit of Dementia (NAD) presents the results of the fifth round of audit data. For the first time, the audit has been undertaken prospectively, which will enable hospitals to take earlier action to improve patient care and experience. However, this has demonstrated that many hospitals still have no ready mechanism to identify people with dementia once admitted. One notable improvement is delirium screening (dementia is the biggest risk factor for developing delirium). Screening for delirium has improved from 58% in round 4 to 87% in the current audit. In addition, a high number of pain assessments are also being undertaken within 24 hours of admission (85%). Although encouraging, the report highlights that 61% of these assessments were based only on a question about pain—an approach that can be unreliable in patients with dementia. While this report acknowledges that our health services have experienced an extraordinarily difficult and challenging time, it does shine a light on a need for more training. It states that is encouraging that many staff have received Tier 1 dementia training (median 86%), but suggests that a much higher proportion of ward-based patient facing staff should have received Tier 2 dementia training (median 45%). It found that only 58% of hospitals are able to report the proportion of staff who have received training. As such, the report recommends that any member of staff involved in the direct care of people with dementia should have Tier 2 training, and this training should be recorded to provide assurance to the public and regulators.
  16. Content Article
    This report by the Royal College of Midwives (RCM) highlights the impact of midwifery staffing shortages on women. It looks at historical failures to invest appropriately in maternity services and talks about a mounting maternity crisis, drawing attention to Care Quality Commission inspections of maternity services that are identifying concerns around safety directly linked to staffing shortages. According to the report’s findings, if the number of NHS midwives in England had risen at the same pace as the overall health service workforce since the last general election, there would be no midwife shortage; there would be 3,100 more midwives in the NHS, rather than having a shortfall of 2,500 full-time midwives. The RCM published the results of a survey last month which showed that midwives give 100,000 hours of free labour to the NHS per week to ensure safe care for women. It also showed that staffing levels were repeatedly cited as cause for concern around the safety of care, and that midwives and maternity support workers are exhausted and burnt out.
  17. Content Article
    9.1 million people will be living with major illness by 2040, 2.5 million more than in 2019, according to this new report published by the Health Foundation. The analysis is part of a four-year project led by the Health Foundation’s Real Centre in partnership with the University of Liverpool, focusing on levels of ill health in the adult population in England up to 2040. It lays out the scale and impact of the growth in the number of people living with major illness as the population ages. The analysis finds that 19 of the 20 health conditions studied are projected to increase in prevalence, including a rise of more than 30% in the number of people living with conditions such as cancer, diabetes and kidney disease. Overall, the number of people living with major disease is set to increase from almost 1 in 6 of the adult population in 2019, to nearly 1 in 5 by 2040, with significant implications for the NHS, other public services and the public finances. The challenges of improving care for an ageing population and enabling people to live independent lives for longer are not unique to England, with countries across the globe facing similar pressures on their health services. However, with the NHS already under unprecedented strain, the findings point to big changes in how care should be delivered in future. Much of the projected growth in illness relates to conditions such as anxiety and depression, chronic pain and diabetes, which are predominantly managed outside hospitals in primary care and the community. This reinforces the need for investment in general practice and community-based services, focusing on prevention and early intervention to reduce the impact of illness and improve the quality of people’s lives. The analysis finds that 80% of the projected increase in major illness (2 million people) will be among people aged 70 and over, with the remaining 20% (500,000 people) among the working-age population (20-69 years old). It also projects that improvements in some of the main causes of poor health, such as fewer people smoking and lower cholesterol rates, will be offset by the impact of obesity as many people who have been obese for long periods of their lives reach old age. The report warns that there is no silver bullet to reduce the growth in people living with major illness and that supporting people to live well with illness will increasingly be an essential function of health care and other services in the future. Its findings underline the need for a long-term plan to reform, modernise and invest in the NHS alongside a bold, new approach that invests in the nation’s health and wellbeing.
  18. Content Article
    In this report, Patient Safety Learning considers the roles and responsibilities of Integrated Care Systems (ICSs) in relation to patient safety, and how this fits in with the wider patient safety landscape in England. This article contains a summary of the report, which can be read in full here or from downloading the attachment below. Action is needed to ensure that ICSs are not ‘patient safety free zones’, says Patient Safety Learning. A year on from ICSs being placed on a statutory footing, a new report, The elephant in the room: Patient Safety and Integrated Care Systems, argues that there needs to be a greater focus on the role that they play in patient safety. The report sets out what we mean by avoidable harm in healthcare, outlining the scale of this problem and the need for a transformation in approach to improving patient safety. It also looks at the landscape of different coordinating groups and organisations in England that have roles and responsibilities to improve patient safety and reduce avoidable harm. What is revealed is a complex and fragmented environment, lacking strong measures for cross-organisational thinking and coordination to address complex systemic threats to patient safety. Considering the creation and initial development of ICSs, the report highlights how there has been little mention of their role in, or impact on, patient safety. It illustrates that although patient safety has not been set as explicit priority for ICSs, the delivery of safe care runs implicitly through each of their main aims. It goes on to consider the potential role that ICSs can potentially play in helping to embed and improve patient safety. Recommendations Considering the steps that could be taken to address the current gap that exists between patient safety and ICSs, and the wider fragmentation of the patient safety landscape in which they operate within, the report makes the following recommendations: The Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England should consider introducing a fifth aim for ICSs making explicit their role in helping to improve patient safety and reduce avoidable harm. NHS England should update the NHS Patient Safety Strategy to account for ICSs being placed on a statutory footing in July 2022 and set out their roles and responsibilities in relation to this. The Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England should consider revising the remit of the National Patient Safety Committee to take on a greater role in coordinating and joining-up the existing patient safety landscape in England. The National Patient Safety Committee should regularly publish agendas, papers and the minutes of its meetings to help inform all bodies that may be impacted by this, such as ICSs and individual healthcare providers, and also patients and the wider public. Patient Safety Learning comment: Patient Safety Learning Chief Executive Helen Hughes said: “ICSs present a significant opportunity to drive improvements in patient safety in local health systems across the NHS. However, we think patient safety remains the ‘elephant in the room’ in the development of ICS roles and responsibilities. Currently there is not clear guidance or support to ensure that ICSs treat patient safety as a core purpose of healthcare. We believe they need to have specific aims for reducing avoidable harm and improving patient safety. There also needs to be clarity on where the patient safety role of ICSs fits into the wider healthcare system. The landscape of organisations with patient safety roles and responsibilities in England is fragmented and lacks coordination, often ill-suited to tackling complex systemic challenges to patient safety. We believe that the Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England need to consider how to better join-up this system, to promote cross-organisational working, coordination and ultimately reduce avoidable harm.”
  19. Content Article
    This report summarises the key insights from the Birmingham ICS Delivery Forum event, held in Birmingham in April 2023. It places the discussions that took place into the broader context of health and care transformation, both at a local and national level, and uses wider sources and research to expand upon the key points. Key messages about the potential role of Integrated Care Systems (ICSs) Subvert the health and care system: ICSs present a unique opportunity to refocus and rebalance resources into health prevention, early intervention and reducing levels of health inequality. Strive for transformation: ICSs are grappling with unprecedented operational pressures and service demand that can, at times, distract from the ultimate goal of transforming health and care provision. These are not binary choices, as progress in one will advance the other. Be patient with public health and prevention: Initiatives to support public health will take time to bed in and prove their value and ICS strategy should account for this fact. Leadership has a role to play in ensuring that organisations are empowered to take localised action on prevention and health inequalities. Taking preventative action should not be considered a distraction from immediate challenges, but rather, the solution to manging demand in the long-term. Embed awareness of health inequality at all levels, and throughout every programme: Initiatives addressing health inequality cannot be addressed with siloed efforts, it must be a concept that underpins every level of leadership of an ICSs and be fundamental to the system culture. Partnership is essential to unlocking health inequalities and addressing unmet need: As ICSs mature, partnership-based programmes and initiatives are forming an increasing part of ICS strategy to tackle health inequalities and improve population health. Use information governance as an enabler of data sharing: ICSs can harness data governance to viability improve longevity of partnerships and provider collaboratives. Clarify points of entry across the system: Providers of various sizes, in both public and private sectors are experiencing difficulties in accessing the relevant functions of ICSs. Accordingly, ICSs need to provide greater clarity regarding points of entry into the system. Diversify leadership across every level: Diversity of perspectives and professional representation at ICB and ICP level will be crucial to the successful delivery of collaborative, integrated care.
  20. Content Article
    This is the transcript of an oral statement to the House of Commons by Steve Barclay MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, on improving safety in mental health in-patient services across England. In this statement the Secretary of State: Provided an update on the independent inquiry into mental health in-patient care across NHS trusts in Essex between 2000 and 2020. He announced that in response to concerns raised by the inquiry’s Chair, Dr Geraldine Strathdee, about the extremely low engagement from staff at Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, the Government had made the decision to give the inquiry statutory powers. He also noted that Dr Strathdee would be standing down from the inquiry and a new Chair would be appointed in due course. Advised that the findings and recommendations of a rapid review of how data is used in in-patient mental health settings in England has now been published, noting that the Government will consider this report and respond in due course. Stated that the Department of Health and Social Care would be working alongside the new Health Services Safety Investigations Body to undertake a series of investigations focused on mental health inpatient settings on the following themes: how providers learn from deaths in their care and use that learning to improve services, including post-discharge services; how young people are cared for in mental health in-patient services and how that care can be improved; how out-of-area placements are handled; and how to develop a safe staffing model for all mental health in-patient services. The statement was followed by questions and comments from members of the House of Commons.
  21. Content Article
    NHS services have been under increasing pressure in recent years, particularly since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic. We have previously reported on the NHS’s efforts to tackle the backlogs in elective care and its progress with improving mental health services in England. This report gives an overview of NHS services that may be used when people need rapid access to urgent, emergency or other non-routine health services, and whether such services are meeting the performance standards the NHS has told patients they have a right to expect. It covers: general practice community pharmacy 111 calls ambulance services (including 999 calls) urgent treatment centres accident and emergency (A&E) departments. Key findings Population changes are contributing to increasing demand for healthcare. Demand for unplanned or urgent care is increasing. The number of general and acute hospital beds has increased slightly following a downward trend before the Covid-19 pandemic, but occupancy rates have also risen and patients are now staying longer in hospital compared with previous years. The number of NHS staff has increased, including those working in unplanned or urgent care. he number of staff vacancies across the NHS rose from the start of 2021 but has recently fallen. Spending on the NHS continues to increase. The total budget for NHSE in 2022-23 was £152.6 billion, some £28.4 billion more than in 2016-17 at 2022-23 prices. Patients’ access to services for unplanned or urgent care has worsened. There is considerable variation in service performance and access, both between regions and between different providers. Covid-19 had, and continues to have, an adverse impact on the NHS’s capacity to meet healthcare needs. The NHS has not met key operational standards for unplanned or urgent care since before the pandemic. Performance against operational standards, and more widely, has deteriorated further since the onset of the pandemic. Overall performance of the unplanned and urgent care system has been worsened by delays transferring patients from one service to another. The NHS has not been able to secure the full benefits of increased spending and staff numbers and productivity has fallen since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. NHSE has a plan to reduce waiting times and improve patients’ experiences.
  22. Content Article
    In this blog Aiden Fowler, the National Director of Patient Safety in England and a Deputy Chief Medical Officer at the Department of Health and Social Care, reflects on progress made in implementing the NHS Patient Safety Strategy, four years on from its publication. He outlines some of the main programmes of work associated with this and considers their impact on avoidable harm in the NHS.
  23. Content Article
    This standard has been produced by NHS England to promote consistent delivery and quality of specialist orthodontic care provision to patients in England. It aims to ensure that resources invested by the NHS in specialist care are used in the most effective way, provide the best possible quality and quantity of care for patients and meet need rather than serve demand. The standard includes the following information: What is orthodontics? Complexity assessment Illustrative patient journey Assessing need Understanding current provision Model of care Clinical standard National key performance indicators Quality and outcome measures
  24. Content Article
    Despite their widespread use, the impact of commissioners’ policies for body mass index (BMI) for access to elective surgery is not clear. Policy use varies by locality, and there are concerns that these policies may worsen health inequalities. This study in BMC Medicine aimed to assess the impact of policies for BMI on access to hip replacement surgery in England. The authors used National Joint Registry data for 480,364 patients who had primary hip replacement surgery in England between January 2009 and December 2019. They found that rates of surgery fell after localities introduced policies restricting access to surgery based on BMI, whereas rates rose in localities with no policy. Localities with BMI policies have higher proportions of independently funded surgery and more affluent patients receiving surgery, indicating increasing health inequalities, and policies enforcing extra waiting time before surgery were associated with worsening mean pre-operative symptom scores and rising obesity. The authors recommend that BMI policies involving extra waiting time or mandatory BMI thresholds are no longer used to reduce access to hip replacement surgery.
  25. Content Article
    Digital health inequality, observed as differential utilisation of digital tools between population groups, has not previously been quantified in the NHS. But recent developments in universal digital health interventions, including a national smartphone app and online primary care services, allow measurement of digital inequality across a nation. This study in BMJ Health & Care Informatics aimed to measure population factors associated with digital utilisation across 6356 primary care providers serving the population of England. The authors concluded that the study results are concerning for technologically driven widening of healthcare inequalities. They highlight the need for targeted incentives to digital in order to prevent digital disparity from becoming health outcomes disparity.
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.