Two hospitals could lose A&E and maternity (From Wimbledon Guardian)
Contact us: Got a photo? Text SLPICS to 80360, click to upload your story or call
020 8722 6333
Fears for St Helier Hospital's future as two hospitals could face major cuts
3:30pm Wednesday 9th January 2013 in Save St Helier By Sophia Sleigh, Reporter
Two hospitals will lose A&E and maternity
The future of St Helier’s accident and emergency looks even bleaker after it was recommended that two A&Es should close in the region.
The healthcare review Better Services Better Value review (BSBV) last year proposed St Helier Hospital should lose its vital services.
The fight to save the hospital has been dealt another blow after BSBV’s programme board announced on Wednesday, January 9, that two hospitals out of four should lose their A&E and maternity departments.
Either St Helier, Epsom, Kingston or Croydon University Hospital will lose their key departments under the proposals.
A similar announcement was made in March last year and after a scoring panel and financial appraisal it was recommended that St Helier should be the one to face the cuts.
However BSBV, which has already cost taxpayers £2m, is carrying out the same review again but this time including Epsom Hospital in the process.
Politicians and campaigners have been fighting to save St Helier Hospital since it was threatened last year and Ruth Dombey, the leader of Sutton Council said: “If Sutton were to lose these services it would mean our residents would be without local first class medical care.
“We are dedicated to ensuring this doesn’t happen and as a council we will continue to back the hospital in its time of need.”
Councillor Mary Burstow, the chairperson of the health and well being scrutiny committee, said: “It’s our local hospital. It’s vital.
“Anyone who thinks going to St George’s only takes ten minutes has clearly not made the journey on a regular basis.
“I don’t think any hospital should lose its services. I think we need all our hospitals and all our A&Es.”
Michael Bailey, consultant urologist and medical director for the BSBV programme, said: “I would strongly emphasise that no decisions have been made yet.
"These are clinical recommendations from local doctors and nurses only. Further work needs to be done to determine whether they would work in practice.
"We need to look at the impact on patient travel times, NHS staff numbers and what it would mean in terms of finances.
"What the Programme Board agreed was that this work will now be taken forward. Once we have agreed formal recommendations, we will consult the public later this year on whatever is proposed."
Comments(10)
Michael Pantlin
says...
5:03pm Wed 9 Jan 13
Angela M
says...
5:24pm Wed 9 Jan 13
Are they trying to kill off Epsom and Sutton residents to clear the housing shortage?!
Sutton53
says...
6:07pm Wed 9 Jan 13
lilacgeorge
says...
7:18pm Wed 9 Jan 13
""Doctors and nurses at Epsom and St Helier hospitals are urging local people to only use our accident and emergency (A&E) departments if they need to, as both units are currently very busy, with an unprecedented number of people needing urgent hospital treatment.
At St Helier Hospital yesterday (2 January) 70 people who came to A&E needed admitting to the hospital for further treatment. That's an increase of more than 55% when compared to an average Wednesday, when approximately 45 of the people who come to A&E need admitting.
Epsom Hospital is also seeing an increase too, and yesterday admitted 32 patients for urgent treatment, compared to an average of 25 admissions on a normal Wednesday.
This pattern has been ongoing since the festive season, when our A&E departments saw a total of 3,300 patients (1,976 at St Helier Hospital and 1,324 at Epsom Hospital) between Christmas Eve and New Year's Day. That is 5.4% higher than the same period last year""
lilacgeorge
says...
7:21pm Wed 9 Jan 13
""Patients give thumbs-up to A&E at Epsom and St Helier hospitals
A national survey by the Government's health watchdog, the Care Quality Commission, has found that the experience patients have in the A&E (accident and emergency) departments at Epsom and St Helier hospitals is among the best in south west London and Surrey.
The survey, which was filled in by 318 patients who used our A&Es earlier this year, shows a number of key findings, including:
95% of our patients said the A&E was clean or very clean;
84% said the A&E toilets were clean or very clean;
95% did not feel bothered or threatened by other patients;
76% felt they were treated with respect and dignity.
The survey asked patients to mark their A&E experience in a number of different areas, from their care and treatment they received through to the quality of the environment and facilities. They were also asked to give feedback on the tests they received and how they rated the doctors and nurses.
When all the scores were compared with other hospitals it showed that on a national scale our A&E departments were performing at about the same level as most others.
However, on a local level it showed that - along with St George's, Royal Surrey and Frimley Park hospitals - we scored better than other hospitals in south west London and Surrey.
Chief Executive Matthew Hopkins said: "Our A&E departments are very busy places, with more than 143,000 patients coming through the doors in the last year alone. These results show that, despite the challenges of providing high quality care in a demanding environment, our staff are doing just that. I would like to take this opportunity to say a huge thank you to the teams involved.
"It is also good to see how we are performing against other local hospitals in south west London and Surrey. It is helpful to see that we are doing well when compared to our peers.""
GR-London
says...
8:23pm Wed 9 Jan 13
Yet millions of pounds are squandered in many undeserving places.
This country is going down the Third-World route.
annon123
says...
12:24pm Thu 10 Jan 13
uwilllikethis
says...
5:28pm Thu 10 Jan 13
The excuse put forward is that care would be better served in a superhospital. Trying telling that to mothers who may lose their children as no maternity facilities available to those in actual need in the locality. Perhaps the review should consider the real views of the customers. Is the £2m spent on this so far really been Value for Money, or could that have been better spent or vital equipment.
Sutton53
says...
10:30am Fri 11 Jan 13
Michael Pantlin says...
5:00pm Wed 9 Jan 13