Posted on 06/19/2005 1:14:26 PM PDT by FairOpinion
A HOSPITAL told a road accident victim that she would have to wait a year and a half for an NHS brain scan, but could have the procedure done privately at the same unit in two weeks, The Times has learnt. In a case that highlights the crisis in diagnostic tests, King’s College Hospital, London, warned Rachel King that, because of “heavy demand”, the MRI scan that her consultant had sought could be delayed for 80 weeks.
But a handwritten note at the end of the letter gave a telephone number for the hospital’s “self-pay” private clinic, where she could have the procedure in two weeks for £983.
Ms King’s case is the starkest example yet of widespread delays in diagnostic tests across the health service. One in five trusts has waiting times of more than a year for MRI scans, and two in five have waits of more than six months.
A quarter of trusts said that 25 per cent or more of their scanning capacity was not used but lack of staff and resources prevent increased usage.
To cut the backlog, the Department of Health has signed a £90 million contract with Alliance Medical Ltd to provide mobile MRI scanners. The contract has proved controversial, but both AML and the department claim it is now working well and cutting waiting times.
Ms King, 32, from Erith, Kent, was knocked down by a car in January. She suffered a broken collarbone, five broken ribs, a shoulder blade broken in three places and head injuries. She was in hospital for 17 days. After she suffered dizzy spells and reduced vision, her consultant referred her for an MRI scan. She said that she was appalled to receive the letter from King’s, saying that, because of “heavy demand”, the scan would be delayed.
What added insult to injury was the handwritten note on the bottom, which read: “If you want to go privately call 0845 6080991 for prices.”
When she did, the telephone was answered by King’s College Self Pay, who said that the cost of such a scan was £983, and she could have the procedure in a couple of weeks.
“It’s insulting” she said. “I was absolutely distraught. I need reassurance that the damage isn’t permanent. All I want is to know if it is going to get better.
“I still have falls, and I can’t return to work or drive. I’ve never signed on the dole in my life but I have had to now.”
King’s College Hospital said in a statement that it recognised that an 80-week wait for scans was unacceptable. It had recently received funds to expand its services, with the aim of getting waiting times down to 26 weeks by next March.
Patients identified as clinically urgent by referring doctors would be seen sooner, the statement said. It added that the handwritten note had been included because Ms King had discussed with her consultant the possibility of going private.
“It is not considered best practice to have handwritten additions to letters and internal processes will be reviewed in the light of this letter,” it said.
Steve Webb, the Liberal Democrat Shadow Health Secretary, said: “It is simply appalling that while ministers crow about the drop in treatment waiting times, there are still thousands of people languishing for months, or even years, on hidden waiting lists.
“To have to wait 80 weeks just to get a diagnosis before you end up on the official waiting list figures is just simply not good enough. “The NHS needs radical reform to ensure that scanners are used more efficiently, at evenings and weekends, and to cut these long waits.”
Andrew Lansley, the Shadow Health Secretary, said: “The Government talks about waiting times coming down but people are waiting far too long for diagnostics.
“There is increased MRI capacity but not enough staff in the NHS to keep them operating longer hours.”
Lord Warner, the Health Minister, said that no hospital should make patients feel pressured into pursuing private treatment. “It would be completely unacceptable for any hospital to ignore their obligations to provide speedy access to NHS treatment,” he said.
“Instances such as this demonstrate why the Government is right to continue to take urgent action to expand capacity in the NHS. By 2008 nobody will wait longer than 18 weeks from GP appointment to treatment.”
Other cases have illustrated similar problems:
Keith Taylor, a retired teacher from Derby who suffers from tremors in his hands, was told by Derbyshire Royal Infirmary that he faced a 12-month wait for an MRI scan — but got it in weeks by paying £400.
At Kingston Hospital, Southwest London, a leaked letter from a radiologist revealed that waits for scans had risen in the past year from 26 to 52 weeks, and were soon expected to reach 78 weeks. Dr Caroline Ward said that there was spare scanning capacity but no money to use it. It would be used only for urgent referrals and private patients in March as the year’s budget had been spent.
If she could enter the U.S. illegally she could have the MRI this afternoon for free.
But you see, they will say that we can do it better.
Hey, spread the poverty equally.
I had two MRI's done last year. I only had to wait a week for each of them.
It's a shame. Those poor people are taxed to death in order to provide this service and yet still can't get it.
Are you in the UK?
"Free" government health care=regulation=price control=rationing.
At least she had the option of a private medical provider. If memory serves, our "hillary-care" proposal of the last administration either outlawed or severely restricted the availability of such private practice.
"If memory serves, our "hillary-care" proposal of the last administration either outlawed or severely restricted the availability of such private practice."
You are right. I actually got the full text and read parts of it. There were severe penalties to the doctors for treating privately.
Coming soon to the People's Republic of Vermont, where opinion polls indicate a majority of citizens WELCOME 'socialized medicine', EVEN if it means an INCREASE in taxation. Moonbats.
BUMPping
"King’s College Hospital said in a statement that it recognised that an 80-week wait for scans was unacceptable. It had recently received funds to expand its services, with the aim of getting waiting times down to 26 weeks by next March."
Oh goodie
The problem is that the US is already providing socialized medicine for everyone through the emergency room. A well-designed universal health insurance scheme, with emphasis on prevention, would cost less to the taxpayer. Health care is infrastructure.
Is the American system doing any better? The US spends up to 14% of the GDP on health care while other Western countries reach same or better life expectancy rates etc. with 8% of the GDP.
"A well-designed universal health insurance scheme, with emphasis on prevention, would cost less to the taxpayer."
1. No it wouldn't.
2. The only way they would control cost is by rationing healthcare.
3. The HMO-s were supposed to emphasize prevention, and it turned out they are RATIONING health care, tests, treatments, access to specialists, etc.
And note that we are talking about an accident victim who is showing symptoms of possible brain injury -- i.e. she has an accute condition. She was in the hospital for over two weeks. One would think they would have done the MRI-s right then.
"Ms King, 32, from Erith, Kent, was knocked down by a car in January. She suffered a broken collarbone, five broken ribs, a shoulder blade broken in three places and head injuries. She was in hospital for 17 days. After she suffered dizzy spells and reduced vision, her consultant referred her for an MRI scan. She said that she was appalled to receive the letter from King’s, saying that, because of “heavy demand”, the scan would be delayed. "
It disgusting really.
She'd better find a way to pay for it on her own.
I doubt it. If you are white and/or speak english, regardless of immigration status, you won't get treatment unless you provide proof of insurance up front.
I will say it again. I practice in a town of 5,000 in Arkansas. If I want an MRI done now it will be done NOW. See how easy it is. If I say next earliest date it will be within at the max 5 working days.
"I practice in a town of 5,000 in Arkansas."
That's exactly the point. This delay is in the UK, a direct result of socialized, government run healthcare.
Mark
So we have better socialize medicine.
I'm so proud.
"Eventually, if you wait long enough, it's possible that many of those on the list in front of you will die."
====
Precisely. I guess it will solve the social security problem as well, making sure very few people live long enough to collect.
In the American system, you need medical care, you get medical care (except is your insurance is an HMO, which is a microcosm of what happens, when the incentive is to NOT treat, people, instead of to treat them, which is what socialized medicine is based on)
That was actually a major part of the original design of SS.
Mark
No, I'm not. I mentioned my experiences with MRI's to show the differences between wait times in the US and the UK.
This is the kind of health care that The Former Twelfth Lady wants for us.Certainly not for herself,however.
The Little People can be euthanized by refusing dialysis to people over 65, they can be put on Waiting Lists, and euthanized that way, they can be spied on by ubiquitous cameras, and taxed extra for the luxury of colour TV.
The possibilities for savage amusement are endless, when you OWN the Commoners.
They can even have hilarious side-splitting fun by telling a kidney stone patient to wait four months till the wandering lithotryptor van shows up somewhere near them. HAHA! Have you ever SEEN someone in kidney stone pain??!!! Oh, it's just priceless!
Sarcasm off, long enough to state with all seriousness, that ANY politician who champions this inhumane and degrading system needs to be instantly and summarily removed by any means available.
"That was actually a major part of the original design of SS."
Exactly right. Live expectancy at the time was around 67, at age 20. Which means that only half the people lived past age 67, but everyone paid into it all their lives.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html
I'd like a scheme like that.
In CA there is some socialized medicine bill, which past at least some of the committees in the Legislature.
If it does pass, if Arnold vetoes nothing but that, he will be the savior of CA.
I remember people who used to live in E. Europe under the communist system, where healthcare was "free" telling me, that before they sent out the ambulance, they asked the patient's age and if he/she was over 65, they wouldn't even come out. And all the medical equipment was from the stone age, because they didn't want to spend the money on it. Of course if you were some high party member, you went to Switzerland and got real medical care.
As someone said, if you think medical care is expensive now, wait until it's "free".
There is private insurance available for people in the UK and in other European countries to supplement the public health care system. If you are willing to pay for it, you can get an MRI on the same day.
"That 6% buys a lot of suffering, I guess as long as it is someone else doing the suffering it is acceptable. When it is me, or my loved ones, I am willing to pay, and thank the lord there are those who can legally accept my payment in exchange for treatment."
Are you really able to pay out of the pocket for all medical care for your family without an insurance? Cancer treatment can cost millions of dollars.
The US has many people who overuse health care. When it's "free" to the consumer (and also immediately available), then people will run to the doctor or emergency room at the slightest twinge.
Care is "free" to people on Medicare, Medicaid, or in an HMO. That is, they pay only a fraction of the real cost.
Also, we have a truly litigious society. Doctors prevent lawsuits by ordering numerous unnecessary tests, second opinions, etc.
That all costs money, but most of it is for nothing of value.
The best way, IMO, to make health care available when needed, but not wasted for frivolous reasons, is to make the patient pay full value for every ordinary procedure, and only use insurance for exceptional circumstances. We could give the poor vouchers for ordinary care, but make them pay for the silliness like ambulance rides to the ER for an infected mosquito bite.
Heath care providers can't provide prevention services because people only come in when something's wrong, often because they weren't taking care of themselves.
If one were the type to routinely seek "preventative" care, then that person most likely is not smoking and is eating right and exercising.
In other words, preventative care is our responsibilty. There's endless good information available - you don't need to go to a building for it. Everyone knows smoking and McDonalds are not the roads to health.
People who think socialized medicine is the answer better take a look at this.
---
And if you don't believe that, take a look at this:
http://www.neoperspectives.com/canadahealthcare.htm
A collection of stories with commentary describing how Canada is killing it's citiens. (via health socialism, of course)
Some other stories on Britian here:
http://www.neoperspectives.com/britishhealthcare.htm
As I've said earlier, health care is already a right in the US. Nobody can be denied access to the emergency room.
I favor the French system with a universal public insurance and private care providers. The Canadian system is mess with its bans on private supplemental insurance etc.
Here on the border near Canada...we are already aware of the Canadian "waits" - wait for the kidney wait for the heart surgery - wait for this and that - die already!
The hospitals on the US side do most of their business with Canadians paying up for their medical needs.
They don't care if its the answer or not. They just want control.
That's what I thought you meant, but I wasn't sure.
Thanks for the clarification.
"Cancer treatment can cost millions of dollars."
THAT's why we have INSURANCE, PRIVATE insurance. The point of insurance is to spread the risk. But if it's a single payee, government insurance, the only way to control costs is to deny care.
it is amazing how liberals whine that voting is a right and it is intolerable that anyone have to wait in line to vote.
the same liberals say health care is a right, but dont seem to upsent when someone has to wait 80 weeks to exercise their "rights"
People in Canada were NOT allowed to have private insurance. Their Supreme Court just recently ruled that denying availability of private insurance is unconstitutional.
Hillary care also made private practice illegal, it was the government system or nothing.
My point is that providing care to the uninsured through the emergency room is costing the US taxpayer and those with insurance dearly.
BTW, if you don't believe a super-majority of the US population considers health care a right, what do you think would be the result of a poll asking whether those without an insurance should be denied emergency care? Would YOU deny emergency care to the uninsured?
Thanks for the great links. They will come in handy the next time someone extolls the virtues of socialized medicine.
Hillary care also made private practice illegal, it was the government system or nothing.
I'm NOT advocating for the Canadian system, which reeks of the worst kind of socialism. My humble opinion is that the US needs a system of basic, universal health insurance which people can freely supplement with private insurance. The provider side should be fully private, including privatization of the military hospital and medical centers.
The cost of private insurance is constantly increasing due to the insane US system of last-minute emergency care for the uninsured, misuse of the HMO system etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.