Efficiency In Hospitals

[El Cid 218]

Lord Carter's review of efficiency in hospitals suggests how large savings can be made by the NHS. The final report, Productivity in NHS hospitals, sets out how non-specialist acute trusts can reduce unwarranted variation in productivity and efficiency to save the NHS £5 billion each year by 2020/21.

 

In his review of NHS spending, Carter argued that the NHS in England could save £5bn a year through better staff organisation and an improved approach to purchasing.

[Lex Luthor 10]

I think the current crisis has highlighted that central government efficiency is a far bigger problem.

 

[El Cid 218]

34 minutes ago, Lex Luthor said:

I think the current crisis has highlighted that central government efficiency is a far bigger problem.

 

Is it the Government or is it NHS England? We will see how the different organisations cope.

Scotland are seem to have fewer coronavirus, a slower growth, maybe having more warning about the task will give them an advantage.

I started this thread because andyofborg claimed £8 billion was being wasted. Does getting the figures wrong matter to us, non-accountantants?

The report was from 2016, so the Tories would have carried out the recommendations? The NHS funding has not kept up with patient numbers and the type of care they need.

[andyofborg 11]

2 hours ago, El Cid said:

I started this thread because andyofborg claimed £8 billion was being wasted. Does getting the figures wrong matter to us, non-accountantants?

 

oi! it wasn't me who claimed that!  

 

I quoted someone else.

[alchresearch 214]

4 hours ago, El Cid said:

In his review of NHS spending, Carter argued that the NHS in England could save £5bn a year through better staff organisation and an improved approach to purchasing.

IT purchasing has always been a bugbear of mine.  They buy computers and printers with a three year warranty, then dispose of them at scrap value by the end of year two.

 

Companies then snap these up like they're doing the NHS a favour by taking them off their hands, then they re-sell them for a minimum of £100 upwards depending on spec.

 

These machines then go on to work perfectly fine for another five years.

 

I would much rather buy them direct from the NHS or an offshoot of the NHS so the profits stay in-house as it were.

[El Cid 218]

6 minutes ago, alchresearch said:

IT purchasing has always been a bugbear of mine.  They buy computers and printers with a three year warranty, then dispose of them at scrap value by the end of year two.

It is one of those things that many right wingers say. If it was something that could be 'fixed', surely the Tories would have sorted it by now?

[peteh1 10]

32 minutes ago, alchresearch said:

IT purchasing has always been a bugbear of mine.  They buy computers and printers with a three year warranty, then dispose of them at scrap value by the end of year two.

Not sure that can be always the case, as many machines suffered a recent ransomware attack due in part to outdated software.

[the_bloke 17]

59 minutes ago, El Cid said:

It is one of those things that many right wingers say. If it was something that could be 'fixed', surely the Tories would have sorted it by now?

I'd like to think that MP's have better things to do than tell the NHS how and when to dispose of its IT equipment. There are plenty of very well paid non surgical staff throughout the NHS that should be doing that kind of thing.

 

Government shouldn't be micromanaging the public sector. It gives high level instructions which should then be executed by various people down the chain of command according to the responsibilities and job roles of those people. 

35 minutes ago, peteh1 said:

Not sure that can be always the case, as many machines suffered a recent ransomware attack due in part to outdated software.

That's because large parts of the NHS runs out of date software on new hardware.

 

Bit like fax machines. The NHS is the biggest user of fax machines in the UK; that doesn't mean all those fax machines are ancient even though the technology is ancient.

[Annie Bynnol 612]

1 hour ago, alchresearch said:

IT purchasing has always been a bugbear of mine.  They buy computers and printers with a three year warranty, then dispose of them at scrap value by the end of year two.

 

Companies then snap these up like they're doing the NHS a favour by taking them off their hands, then they re-sell them for a minimum of £100 upwards depending on spec.

 

These machines then go on to work perfectly fine for another five years.

 

I would much rather buy them direct from the NHS or an offshoot of the NHS so the profits stay in-house as it were.

Your view of IT purchasing and disposal in the NHS is flawed.

Less than a year ago the issue of NHS still using  out of date hardware and software was headline news.

 

It is a requirement that all NHS computers, tablets,  phones etc. , must be disposed of by authorised personnel or companies inline with the most scrupulous  attention to  System security,  Data Protection and Safeguarding. The costs  involved and the low specification and quality of the equipment reflect the re-sale value often resulting in recycling  being the best economic solution.

 

This is normal for all businesses and organizations who hold sensitive information on people and their activities. 

It is wasteful of resources, but it is the norm.

[apelike 10]

3 hours ago, the_bloke said:

Bit like fax machines. The NHS is the biggest user of fax machines in the UK; that doesn't mean all those fax machines are ancient even though the technology is ancient.

The NHS may have been the biggest user of Fax machines in the past but as of today all NHS Trusts should have phased them out. The idea is to encourage Trusts to be more secure and invest in newer tech.

 

Some of that newer tec is in the form of the touch screen login systems and also sending an update text about scheduled appointments

Edited March 31, 2020 by apelike

[Chez2 10]

2 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

Your view of IT purchasing and disposal in the NHS is flawed.

Less than a year ago the issue of NHS still using  out of date hardware and software was headline news.

 

It is a requirement that all NHS computers, tablets,  phones etc. , must be disposed of by authorised personnel or companies inline with the most scrupulous  attention to  System security,  Data Protection and Safeguarding. The costs  involved and the low specification and quality of the equipment reflect the re-sale value often resulting in recycling  being the best economic solution.

 

This is normal for all businesses and organizations who hold sensitive information on people and their activities. 

It is wasteful of resources, but it is the norm.

I would like to be able to quote for any level of security for IT data cleansing or destruction / reuse / recycling as a comparison.  I very much doubt they are getting value for money.

[the_bloke 17]

14 hours ago, apelike said:

The NHS may have been the biggest user of Fax machines in the past but as of today all NHS Trusts should have phased them out. The idea is to encourage Trusts to be more secure and invest in newer tech.

Only because the Health Secretary told them to. It shouldn't take a minister to tell the NHS that they are 20 years out of date should it? How many of these high salaried trust managers over the last 20, 30 years have looked at the communications budget for their trust and thought 'excellent work, all these fax machines and dedicated phone lines are great value for taxpayers money, lets stick with using them'? I assume they all did!