Skip to main content

Launch of NHS 111 must be delayed as crisis worsens, warns BMA


GP leaders today (Thursday, 28 March 2013) called for Sir David Nicholson, Chief Executive of the NHS Commissioning Board, to delay the launch of NHS 111 as the crisis affecting the system threatens to put patient safety at risk1.

NHS 111, a telephone triage service designed to direct people with non life threatening conditions to the right part of the NHS within the appropriate timeframe, has been trialled in England ahead of a nationwide launch on Monday, 1 April2. At the same time, Clinical Commissioning Groups are scheduled to assume responsibility for commissioning services in the NHS and oversee the NHS 111 system in their region3.

Dr Laurence Buckman, Chair of the BMA’s GP Committee, said:

“The BMA has written to Sir David Nicholson and asked him to delay the launch of NHS 111 until the system is fully safe for the public. We cannot sacrifice patient safety in order to meet a political deadline for the launch of a service that doesn’t work properly.

“There have been widespread reports of patients being unable to get through to an operator or waiting hours before getting a call back with the health information they have requested.

“In some areas, such as Greater Manchester, NHS 111 effectively crashed because it was unable to cope with the number of calls it was receiving.

“The chaotic mess now afflicting NHS 111 is not only placing strain on other already over stretched parts of the NHS, such as the ambulance service, but is potentially placing patients at risk. If someone calls NHS 111 they need immediate, sound advice and not be faced with any form of delay.

“The BMA is particularly concerned that CCGs will find it difficult to cope with the worsening crisis now gripping NHS 111 when they take responsibility for the service next week.

“CCGs will be taking over a service they did not commission or ask to be set up, at a pressurised time when they are also assuming responsibility for a raft of other services and budgets within the NHS. The government has also made it clear that CCGs will have to foot the bill for any financial costs, such as hiring staff to cover for NHS 111 failures.

“The BMA has been warning the government about the problems with NHS 111 for almost two years. They must act soon to ensure that patient safety is protected.”

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

Mr Duncan-Smith offers a disingenuous and divisive comparison

Some time ago, actually it was a long time ago when I was in my early teens, someone close to me bought a table. It was an early flat pack variety. It came with a top and four legs. He followed the instructions to the letter screwing the legs into the top. But when he had completed it the table wobbled. One leg he explained was shorter than the other three; so he sawed a bit from each of the other legs. The table wobbled. One leg, he explained, was longer than the other three. So, he sawed a bit off. The table wobbled. He went on cutting the legs, but the table continued to wobble. Cut, cut, cut! By this time he had convinced himself there was no alternative to it.  He ended up with a very low table indeed, supported by four very stumpy legs and a bit of cardboard placed under one of them to stop it wobbling on the uneven floor.  Mr Duncan-Smith argues that we need a 1% cap on benefits to be 'fair to average earners'. Average  earners have seen their incomes rise by less tha

His way or none? Why I can't vote for Jeremy

There is an assumption that all would be well with the Labour Party if people hadn't expressed their genuine concern with what they consider the inadequacies of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership. If only, it is said, the Parliamentary Labour Party and his Shadow Cabinet had supported him, instead of undermining him, all would have been fine. If they had been quiet and towed the line, then the party would not have been in the mess it is in. So, should they have stayed silent, or speak of their concerns? There comes a point when the cost of staying silent outweighs the cost of speaking out. This is a judgment. Many call it a coup by the PLP. They paint a picture of a right-wing PLP out of touch with the membership.  This is the narrative of the Corbyn camp. But Jeremy Corbyn, over the decades he has been in politics, showed the way.  It was Jeremy Corbyn who opposed almost all Labour leaders and rarely held back from speaking out, or voting time and again against the party line. As