Improving health and healthcare in the UK is a complex task involving a myriad of healthcare organisations, service providers, government bodies, commissioning boards and many other interested parties. The main healthcare provider is the NHS which is a huge, public funded organisation incorporating hospitals, GP's, dentists and community care.
The NHS is currently undergoing major change in its structure and how it delivers its services. Decision making, budgets and who spends the money will be the responsibility of new organisations controlled through GP led structures called Clinical Commissioning Groups.
A focus on improving health care
The objective is very simply to have a healthcare system in the UK that consistently delivers the highest possible quality of healthcare services.
That service should be delivered in a safe and effective manner, on time and in a way that is person centred and equal to all.
Patient safety is a fundamental aspect of the system of improved healthcare and has at its core a commitment to provide patients with safe and reliable care services. This incorporates methods of identifying potential risks and control systems to improve monitoring and measuring process and outcomes. Developing a culture of transparency and honesty in relation to this is a critical component for success.
People-centred care is about developing a system of care provision that supports the people providing the healthcare to do so in a way that puts patients first and at the very core of the service. This can often mean a fundamental change in the way health care providers deliver and manage the service at all levels and in fact to be effective must also incorporate a change in how patients think as part of the system.
The objective of a people centred care system is to enable people to make informed decisions and choices about their own health and associated health care. This will involve a significant change in current health provision practices and the way patients think about this and their interaction with the service. So the change process needs a systematic approach to establish a framework and structure that assists and supports the introduction of new practices, roles and relationships.
A key part of all of this will be an effective process that ensures progress is monitored and measured to provide the feedback and guidance that will be necessary to facilitate the quality and pace of change required.
Funding, budgets and commercial realities
The NHS continues to be almost entirely funded by taxpayers where nobody is charged for using the service. This format dates back to 1948 and was based on the assumption that the demand for medical care and treatment would reduce as peoples general health improved. Demographic changes however coupled with increased life expectancy rates has resulted in increased demand for health care services to the extent that annual expenditure almost doubled from 1999 to 2012.
An increasing population in conjunction with an aging population simply means that service requirements are likely to increase and either taxes will have to increase to pay for the NHS or the funding will have to come from elsewhere. There are different funding models operating throughout Europe incorporating mixtures of public and private funding and operational models. It has also been claimed that many of the European systems provide a better quality service.
The commercial realities are obvious and change is certainly required. However there is more to the equation than purely funding and finance as the political implications of making radical change are likely to be too great for any government to undertake.
Making a contribution
There are many stakeholders involved in the NHS but we shouldn't forget that the system is funded by the people for the benefit of the people. We should all therefore be part of the requirement and absolute necessity of establishing a health care system that provides value for money and is tasked to provide the highest levels of healthcare possible.
For our part we will continue to ask questions, stimulate the debate, share knowledge and hopefully contribute in a positive and constructive way.
For More Information : http://www.bharatbook.com/healthcare-market-research-reports/structure-of-uk-healthcare-services.html
This report summaries the structure of the UK’s healthcare services. its current state, its drivers and its evolution. This overview of the market is intended for those considering this market for the first time and those who have experience of this sector.
Introduction and Landscape
This report provides a detailed overview of the structure of the UK healthcare services ICT market. It provides both tactical and strategic users insights into the usage of ICT across the UK health services.
Key Features and Benefits
Structure of the UK healthcare services: including overview of reforms, local organizations, primary and secondary care commissioning groups.
Key Market Issues
• Gain insight into structural reforms within the UK healthcare service.
• Gain knowledge about each nations planned spending over the next three years.
The UK’s four governments, each of which runs its own independent healthcare system, expect to spend £121.6bn on health in 2011-12, rising 7.6% in cash terms over the next three years to £130.8bn in 2014-15.
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are not undertaking reorganisations of their health services and are planning smaller spending increases than England.
Bharat Book Presents: Structure of UK healthcare services
Oct. 21 |
4.5 For More Information : http://www.bharatbook.com/healthcare-market-research-reports/structure-of-uk-healthcare-services.html Product Synopsis This report summaries the structure...
All organisations both public and private need to establish and develop a culture of safety and safe working practices.
It’s an ethos and modus operandi that is absolutely vital for health care organisations. Patient safety must be an absolute priority but this needs to be provided within an environment that is safe for staff and also the general public.
Systems and human factors
It has often been quoted that the major determinant of care quality is the systems through which services are delivered and not the individual care provider. But whilst systems are important it is a key factor of success that human factors are put at the forefront of establishing a culture of safety.
The basis of a safety culture is where staff at all operational levels are consistently and actively aware that things can always go wrong. As an integral part of this, mistakes must be openly and honestly acknowledged and action taken to minimise the potential for them to happen again.
Safety at every turn
The desired culture of safety must permeate throughout the organisation to even the simplest and most mundane of tasks. If for example you look at the often reactionary spreading of rock salt as a de-icer after snow has fallen or ice has taken hold, which would be the norm in most health care centres, then the obvious question is why isn’t a more preventative method in place as a safer alternative.
The responsibility for creating a strong and cohesive organisational safety culture is a key responsibility of leaders, and active and visible participation is required from the very top of the management structure. However in order to be effective it needs the enthusiastic involvement of all employees.
A place for the private sector
There is much debate about the role of the private sector in the NHS and indeed in some quarters the argument is about whether the private sector should be involved at all. In todays modern society however it would seem sensible to have a balance of both public and private funding and resource. This should provide the best of both worlds in terms of efficiency, patient focussed services, long term investment and of course the important aspect of funding and balancing the books.
The worry has always been that the private sector has serious drawbacks in terms of its focus on profit and the effect this may have on patient care. Long term financial funding and investment are other areas of concern. The detractors of private sector involvement point to instances of poor performance and service failure including instances such as quality and hygiene standards with cleaning services, the provision of poor quality support staff and examples where private companies have had questionable financial structures which have led to financial difficulties, debt problems and even them going bankrupt as has been the case with many private care homes.
However the other side of the argument is that the NHS itself has experienced serious problems in terms of patient care, standards and meeting minimum service levels. It is also argued that funding restrictions have impacted on service provision. So it would seem that there are issues whether public or private and the key would seem to be to incorporate the two and find ways to achieve objectives, improve financial structures, find debt solutions and resolve financial difficulties with a view to building a combined structure that delivers the health service patients need and in fact deserve.