It was reported a few days ago that Tesco is better able to keep account of us than is the NHS. Tesco is able to keep track of what goods and services we buy from it, when we bought them, where we bought them, as well as to track changes in our pattern of activity. The NHS, for whom you would think that being able to know what medicines patients are taking, for what conditions, in what doses, and so on, apparently cannot, despite billions of Pounds having been spent on computer systems. I can believe it.
Recently, my wife splashed acid into her eye, from some cleaning product. Fortunately, she was able to quickly wash her eye with clean water. She thought no more about it, until later in the day, when she noticed that her eye had gone red and inflamed. We rang 111, who after a time recommended going to A & E. This was now in the early evening, mid-week. We drove to A & E, where I dropped off my wife, before going to deal with parking the car. That alone proved to be an issue, because the ticket machine was deciding not to take any money. Here was the first instance of the failure of the NHS to have any joined up systems.
I reported to the Reception desk that the machine did not seem to be working. "Not our machines." The receptionist replied, before handing me the phone to speak to someone from the company that actually handles management of the car park. Having explained the problem, and where the machine was, I was told that it was already reported, and that I should not worry about it. All very well, except you are still worrying about whether when you come to return to your car a couple of hours later, it will have been clamped, or whether when you leave the car park, some number registration software is till going to be triggered to send you a nasty bill through the post.
As it turned out, had the machine been working, the 4 hours parking I had intended to have paid for would have been somewhat less than adequate, anyway.
There were not that many people actually waiting in A&E, only about 50. Yet, by the end of our time there, given that these same 50 people more or less shared the whole of the experience with us, we could, had we have known, have become well acquainted with each other. It was not that an overwhelming number of people needed to be seen to that could explain the length of the wait to be seen, simply the length of time taken to deal with each person, which suggests that the department was grossly under resourced.
After about 2 hours, we got to see the triage nurse. This time was essentially wasted, because she only took the same details that had previously been given, several hours earlier to the 111 Service, which you would think could have been simply transferred by Internet, to the A&E. After all, 111 had said, go to see someone at A&E within the next 1 to 2 hours, because the acid could cause longer lasting damage if its not dealt with. In fact, I suspect that the only point of the triage stage was so that the NHS could say that people had been seen inside the 4 hour waiting target.
We were told by the nurse that it would need to be dealt with by a doctor or practice nurse. How long will they take, we asked. Currently more than 4 hours, we were told. We went to sit back with the same now familiar 50 faces in the waiting room. Some of them were clearly in a state that should have been dealt with long before. One woman was clearly suffering from a state of severe mental illness, which begged the question of why she had not been taken into care long before. There were not even many drunks that had found their way into mishap. One was accompanied by a security guard, as he dripped blood from his face, as he was led to the toilets, which were subsequently labelled as out of use, but which continued to be use for the next 2 hours, prior to the cleaning staff arriving to clean them. One man in a wheelchair, suffered a seizure that provoked, at least, a rapid response, as he was whisked away. Indeed, it made me wonder whether this was, in fact, just another stage of triage, whereby those waiting either, gave up, died, or else worsened so noticeably that they were moved on to the next stage of the production line.
The hours continued to tick by, by which time we were ourselves beginning to think that indeed this secondary form of triage was leading to the conclusion that, if by now, my wife had not began to bleed from the eyes, or to have lost her sight, then perhaps there was no real urgency, as 111, had suggested to have the matter dealt with urgently, within the hour, because that period had come and gone long before. In fact, we had now been there so long, it was now approaching three o'clock in the morning, that it was difficult to know whether the redness in my wife's eye was due to inflammation caused by the acid, or simply from lack of sleep. One young man sitting in a row behind us, commented to one of those that had accompanied him that you could see why people in America preferred to pay for health care so as to avoid such an inadequate service. By this time, I was starting to have sympathy with such sentiments.
We decided to give it another 15 minutes, after which, if there was no sign of being seen, we would give it up, because to make matters worse, we had to be out the following day by 7.30, and it was now looking like, at this rate, we would get no sleep, even if we had been seen by that time. But, at that point, my wife noticed that a frail looking man in a wheelchair, who had been waiting as long as us, appeared to be in some distress, and was in danger of becoming unconscious and slipping out of the chair. She went over to him, to support him, whilst I went to reception to try to get someone to get a doctor to him. A receptionist came out to him, and then immediately disappeared, we assumed to get a doctor, but we never saw him again. After ten minutes, still no one had come, and so as two paramedics came by, my wife collared them for assistance. "Sorry we are ambulance staff not hospital staff, they replied, and we can't get involved." By this time, our allotted 15 minutes had also passed, and so we gave up on the NHS, and went home.
The following day, we went to a pharmacy, following the advice given to use their trained staff rather than trouble the NHS. The pharmacy was happy to sell us some eye wash, but again repeated the advice of 111, to see a doctor or go to A&E, an experience we had no desire to repeat. So, we rang our GP surgery, who said it was necessary to see someone else. They made an appointment for us to go to a Healthy Living Centre that evening at 7.00 p.m. The experience there was much better than the previous night, despite the fact that it was a Friday. We saw a doctor within 2 hours, but he could only say that he did not have the equipment required to tell if there was any damage to the cornea, and so it was necessary to go to an eye clinic, where they have such equipment. He prescribed some eye drops.
The next day, I suggested to my wife that she ring Specsavers. Despite it being a Saturday, and despite the store having about the same number of people waiting to be seen as had been in A&E, they were able to quickly confirm that they did indeed have the required equipment to undertake the examination and diagnosis, and within twenty minutes she had seen an opthalmist, who confirmed that there was no real damage that had been caused, and they were able to pull up her previous records, as well as there being no charge for the examination. While I was waiting I had my own glasses repaired, also for free.
Around 25% of people in Britain today have taken out additional healthcare cover. You can see why they have done so. The more those that can take out such cover so as not to have to put their families health and lives at risk from an inadequate health service, the more the NHS, will become just a service meeting the needs of those in society that cannot afford to make alternative arrangements. It means the NHS will go the way of Council Housing. Originally, to get a Council House, you had to meet various criteria, showing that you could pay the rent, that you would keep the property and gardens in good order and so on. From the 1980's, in particular, as Thatcher made it possible for those that could to be able to buy their Council House, thousands did so, to remove themselves from the bureaucracy and restrictions that local councils imposed on them, particularly as they faced rising rents. It increasingly meant that in direct contrast to the early days of Council Housing, it was a form of housing occupied by the worst off in society, often those in conditions of dependency, and precarity. But, as with Council Housing, its not just a matter of spending more money on it, but of the need for an entirely new model of free at the point of use provision that is required.
No comments:
Post a Comment