scholarly journals Postcode lottery? Hospital transfers from one London prison and responsible catchment area

2010 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 140-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Wilson ◽  
Katrina Chiu ◽  
Janet Parrott ◽  
Andrew Forrester

Aims and methodTo consider the link between responsible commissioner and delayed prison transfers. All hospital transfers from one London prison in 2006 were audited and reviewed by the prisoner's borough of origin.ResultsOverall, 80 prisoners were transferred from the audited prison to a National Health Service (NHS) facility in 2006: 26% had to wait for more than 1 month for assessment by the receiving hospital unit and 24% had to wait longer than 3 months to be transferred. These 80 individuals were the responsibility of 16 different primary care trusts. Of the delayed transfer cases (n=19), the services commissioned by three primary care trusts were responsible for the delays.Clinical implicationsThere are significant differences in performance between different primary care trusts related to hospital transfers of prisoners, with most hospitals able to admit urgent cases within 3 months. This suggests that a postcode lottery operates for prisoners requiring hospital transfer. Data from prison services may be useful in monitoring and improving the performance of local NHS services.

2009 ◽  
Vol 33 (11) ◽  
pp. 409-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Forrester ◽  
Christopher Henderson ◽  
Simon Wilson ◽  
Ian Cumming ◽  
Miriam Spyrou ◽  
...  

Aims and MethodTo describe a group of prisoners who required transfer to mental health units from two London prisons. Data were collected from prison clinical records.ResultsOverall, 149 patient-prisoners were transferred over a 17-month period. Around a quarter were not previously known to services. the aggregate wait was 36.5 years (averaging between 93 and 102 days per prisoner) and the total saving to the National Health Service (NHS) has been estimated at £6.759 million.Clinical ImplicationsBoth prisons manage a large number of prisoners with untreated psychosis. While in prison, they save the NHS considerable sums of money, but transfer delays prevent timely treatment and could now be legally challenged.


2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex J. Mitchell ◽  
John Gill

Aims and methodTo examine research productivity of staff working across 57 National Health Service (NHS) mental health trusts in England. We examined research productivity between 2010 and 2012, including funded portfolio studies and all research (funded and unfunded).ResultsAcross 57 trusts there were 1297 National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) studies in 2011/2012, involving 46140 participants and in the same year staff in these trusts published 1334 articles (an average of only 23.4 per trust per annum). After correcting for trust size and budget, the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust was the most productive. In terms of funded portfolio studies, Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust as well as South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust had the strongest performance in 2011/2012.Clinical implicationsTrusts should aim to capitalise on valuable staff resources and expertise and better support and encourage research in the NHS to help improve clinical services.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Willis ◽  
Paul Duckworth ◽  
Angela Coulter ◽  
Eric T Meyer ◽  
Michael Osborne

BACKGROUND Recent advances in technology have reopened an old debate on which sectors will be most affected by automation. This debate is ill served by the current lack of detailed data on the exact capabilities of new machines and how they are influencing work. Although recent debates about the future of jobs have focused on whether they are at risk of automation, our research focuses on a more fine-grained and transparent method to model task automation and specifically focus on the domain of primary health care. OBJECTIVE This protocol describes a new wave of intelligent automation, focusing on the specific pressures faced by primary care within the National Health Service (NHS) in England. These pressures include staff shortages, increased service demand, and reduced budgets. A critical part of the problem we propose to address is a formal framework for measuring automation, which is lacking in the literature. The health care domain offers a further challenge in measuring automation because of a general lack of detailed, health care–specific occupation and task observational data to provide good insights on this misunderstood topic. METHODS This project utilizes a multimethod research design comprising two phases: a qualitative observational phase and a quantitative data analysis phase; each phase addresses one of the two project aims. Our first aim is to address the lack of task data by collecting high-quality, detailed task-specific data from UK primary health care practices. This phase employs ethnography, observation, interviews, document collection, and focus groups. The second aim is to propose a formal machine learning approach for probabilistic inference of task- and occupation-level automation to gain valuable insights. Sensitivity analysis is then used to present the occupational attributes that increase/decrease automatability most, which is vital for establishing effective training and staffing policy. RESULTS Our detailed fieldwork includes observing and documenting 16 unique occupations and performing over 130 tasks across six primary care centers. Preliminary results on the current state of automation and the potential for further automation in primary care are discussed. Our initial findings are that tasks are often shared amongst staff and can include convoluted workflows that often vary between practices. The single most used technology in primary health care is the desktop computer. In addition, we have conducted a large-scale survey of over 156 machine learning and robotics experts to assess what tasks are susceptible to automation, given the state-of-the-art technology available today. Further results and detailed analysis will be published toward the end of the project in early 2019. CONCLUSIONS We believe our analysis will identify many tasks currently performed manually within primary care that can be automated using currently available technology. Given the proper implementation of such automating technologies, we expect considerable staff resources to be saved, alleviating some pressures on the NHS primary care staff. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPOR DERR1-10.2196/11232


1999 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 213-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maggie Somerset ◽  
Alex Faulkner ◽  
Alison Shaw ◽  
Liz Dunn ◽  
Deborah J Sharp

2012 ◽  
Vol 36 (10) ◽  
pp. 366-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steffan Davies ◽  
Mick Collins ◽  
Chris Ashwell

Aims and methodThe Security Needs Assessment Profile (SNAP) was developed to provide a detailed description of individual patient's security requirements in the then Trent Region of England. A national survey of secure units was undertaken to examine the content validity of the item structure of SNAP and revise the item definitions to reflect more broadly based clinical practice. A follow-up survey sought views on the usefulness of SNAP in clinical practice.ResultsThirty-five secure units from National Health Service and independent sector providers participated. No new security items were generated. All the item definitions were reviewed, many amended, and a small number revised extensively. Units' security profiles were rated on the original and revised instruments.Clinical implicationsThe revised SNAP has been shown to be generalisable across secure services in England; 92% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that SNAP would be useful in providing a structured security needs assessment.


2009 ◽  
Vol 33 (10) ◽  
pp. 381-383
Author(s):  
Gary S. Stevenson ◽  
Agnieszka Philipson ◽  
Gordon McLaren

Aims and MethodTo examine knowledge among Scottish psychiatrists of the 1996 guidance on National Health Service (NHS) responsibility for continuing healthcare, a postal questionnaire was devised and sent to the 132 consultants and specialist registrars in the South-East Scotland Deanery in May 2007.ResultsTwo-thirds of the clinicians (67%, n= 88) responded, 88% of whom had in-patient responsibilities. Only 24% responded positively to an awareness of the current Scottish guidance. There was a strong association between awareness of the guidance and psychiatric speciality, and greater awareness among clinicians with previous experience of a relevant complaint or appeal.Clinical ImplicationsUncertainty about NHS continuing healthcare guidance among practising psychiatrists suggests a need for increased awareness of the issues, with training implications for the new guidance on NHS continuing healthcare in Scotland which became effective in February 2008.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document