CONservative government incompetence.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
  georgenorman  26 Jan 23 1.53pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
It is rife in any healthcare setting, because getting stuff right is a matter of life or death. For example everyone in a care home should have a care plan, medicines management is critical, CQC requires data and judges sites upon it etc. Do you really think the private sector has less? If so, in my experience you would be wrong. And by the way, I have run two private hospitals and loads of care homes. Furthermore, the alternative to a centrally run system which requires data to operate is a privately run system which... requires data to operate. From Reuters Over one third of all healthcare costs in the U.S. were due to insurance company overhead and provider time spent on billing, versus about 17% spent on administration in Canada, researchers reported in Annals of Internal Medicine. Cutting U.S. administrative costs to the 0 per capita (in 2017 U.S. dollars) level in Canada could save more than 0 billion, the researchers say. Edited by Mapletree (26 Jan 2023 1.30pm) Wow, I wouldn't have liked to have been a patient in one of them, as you previously said: "You are fed this nonsense by people that use private health and who just want to have more money by screwing over anyone that isn’t in the same position."
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Mapletree Croydon 26 Jan 23 2.50pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
Wow, I wouldn't have liked to have been a patient in one of them, as you previously said: "You are fed this nonsense by people that use private health and who just want to have more money by screwing over anyone that isn’t in the same position." Low security hospitals for violent people with mental health problems. So no, you would not have enjoyed being a service user. The furniture had to be so heavy it could not be lifted and used as a weapon. I doubt these service users had a great deal of influence over the Government. But there again...
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 26 Jan 23 3.08pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
It is rife in any healthcare setting, because getting stuff right is a matter of life or death. For example everyone in a care home should have a care plan, medicines management is critical, CQC requires data and judges sites upon it etc. Do you really think the private sector has less? If so, in my experience you would be wrong. And by the way, I have run two private hospitals and loads of care homes. Furthermore, the alternative to a centrally run system which requires data to operate is a privately run system which... requires data to operate. From Reuters Over one third of all healthcare costs in the U.S. were due to insurance company overhead and provider time spent on billing, versus about 17% spent on administration in Canada, researchers reported in Annals of Internal Medicine. Cutting U.S. administrative costs to the 0 per capita (in 2017 U.S. dollars) level seen in Canada could save more than 0 billion, the researchers say. Edited by Mapletree (26 Jan 2023 1.30pm) As a matter of interest, according to The Kings Fund, best estimates suggest that the NHS spends roughly £8 billion of its £100 billion budget on management and administration. Edited by Mapletree (26 Jan 2023 2.53pm) Edited by Mapletree (26 Jan 2023 2.55pm) I was actually talking about different departments in the Public Sector, where the paperwork is not a matter of life and death. From my own experience, much of it is unnecessary and designed by Senior Managers who really did not understand anything about the everyday running of the operation ( no pun intended) or the logistics/timespan involved .
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| georgenorman 26 Jan 23 3.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Low security hospitals for violent people with mental health problems. So no, you would not have enjoyed being a service user. The furniture had to be so heavy it could not be lifted and used as a weapon. I doubt these service users had a great deal of influence over the Government. But there again... How do you square your communist leanings with working in a private hospital?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 26 Jan 23 3.26pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Spiderman
I was actually talking about different departments in the Public Sector, where the paperwork is not a matter of life and death. From my own experience, much of it is unnecessary and designed by Senior Managers who really did not understand anything about the everyday running of the operation ( no pun intended) or the logistics/timespan involved . A job I did for the MOD was to model all of the business processes involved in procuring and keeping in service some 'big things'. When we put the metrics against each procedure, the biggest driver of activity by far was answering Parliamentary Questions. Not bureaucracy that you would say is internal to the organisation but a massive overhead. And yes, I am sure that could be reduced although I think it is important that Government departments are held to account. Since I was doing that work, the Audit Commission was replaced by Public Sector Audit Appointments Ltd, National Audit Office, Financial Reporting Council and Cabinet Office (in April 2015). We don't appear to be getting much from them do we? But as stated above, the alternative is to operate some form of commercial model to manage limited resources. That model also generates a heap of activity as well as leaking money to create profit.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 26 Jan 23 3.31pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
How do you square your communist leanings with working in a private hospital? Very easy I have no Communist leanings. I also believe in the private sector. Just not for massive undertakings that are better performed on behalf of the people directly. I was involved very early in outsourcing, including Voluntary Competitive Tendering of which I was a fan. So it is interesting, is it not, that I would not let United Health (or any other massive healthcare business) anywhere near a significant element of the NHS. The power wielded through the NHS is simply huge, the biggest employer in Europe. At that point profit and politics overlap to far too high a degree.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 26 Jan 23 3.59pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
It is rife in any healthcare setting, because getting stuff right is a matter of life or death. For example everyone in a care home should have a care plan, medicines management is critical, CQC requires data and judges sites upon it etc. Do you really think the private sector has less? If so, in my experience you would be wrong. And by the way, I have run two private hospitals and loads of care homes. Furthermore, the alternative to a centrally run system which requires data to operate is a privately run system which... requires data to operate. From Reuters Over one third of all healthcare costs in the U.S. were due to insurance company overhead and provider time spent on billing, versus about 17% spent on administration in Canada, researchers reported in Annals of Internal Medicine. Cutting U.S. administrative costs to the 0 per capita (in 2017 U.S. dollars) level seen in Canada could save more than 0 billion, the researchers say. Edited by Mapletree (26 Jan 2023 1.30pm) As a matter of interest, according to The Kings Fund, best estimates suggest that the NHS spends roughly £8 billion of its £100 billion budget on management and administration. Edited by Mapletree (26 Jan 2023 2.53pm) Edited by Mapletree (26 Jan 2023 2.55pm) I don't believe that billions will be saved by cutting red tape although I am sure there are savings to be made. As the doctor in the post implied the bureaucracy savings are related to time saving. Due to a lack of technology the same data is collected again and again. Edited by Badger11 (26 Jan 2023 3.59pm)
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| georgenorman 26 Jan 23 4.52pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Very easy I have no Communist leanings. I also believe in the private sector. Just not for massive undertakings that are better performed on behalf of the people directly. I was involved very early in outsourcing, including Voluntary Competitive Tendering of which I was a fan. So it is interesting, is it not, that I would not let United Health (or any other massive healthcare business) anywhere near a significant element of the NHS. The power wielded through the NHS is simply huge, the biggest employer in Europe. At that point profit and politics overlap to far too high a degree. Apart from those expressed in most of your posts you mean?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| EverybodyDannsNow SE19 26 Jan 23 5.07pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
I don't believe that billions will be saved by cutting red tape although I am sure there are savings to be made. As the doctor in the post implied the bureaucracy savings are related to time saving. Due to a lack of technology the same data is collected again and again. Edited by Badger11 (26 Jan 2023 3.59pm) But there's also an enormous time (and financial) cost to that scale of data migration - in an organisation as busy and under-resourced as the NHS, that is an enormous logistical challenge. I'm not saying they shouldn't be looking to modernise, but equally it's not going to be a silver bullet that they get some new technology and all the problems go away. It all just feels like a load of noise to divert conversation away from funding - I'm sure there are small margins to be made in all sorts of areas, as with any business, but I don't think hierarchy and form-filling is why the NHS is in the state it is.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 26 Jan 23 5.11pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
I don't believe that billions will be saved by cutting red tape although I am sure there are savings to be made. As the doctor in the post implied the bureaucracy savings are related to time saving. Due to a lack of technology the same data is collected again and again. Edited by Badger11 (26 Jan 2023 3.59pm) On this we can agree, there is no doubt that better systems would help massively. The NHS launched its National Program for IT (NPfIT) in 2002. Behind it were some of the industry’s most illustrious players, including Accenture, Fujitsu, and CSC. Its failure became obvious nine years later. Given the scale, the planning proved too weak, it focused too much on low cost and not enough on client satisfaction, the NHS did not have strong enough project leadership (especially related to change management) and insufficient stakeholder engagement. This was a big set back and a great deal of wasted money. There is now a new digital care services model that allows NHS care providers and commissioners to source digital tools and systems from a buying catalogue. Hopefully over time this will work better.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 26 Jan 23 5.18pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
Apart from those expressed in most of your posts you mean? You really think so? A theory or system of social organization in which all property is owned by the community and each person contributes and receives according to their ability and needs. Not my cup of tea I suppose it's better than all property being owned by a very few who contribute beggar all to the rest of us though. Half of the world's wealth is owned by 1% of its people. But hey, I am sure they deserve it.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| steeleye20 Online Croydon 26 Jan 23 5.55pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Imagine how much better a Corbyn society would have been. I cant think of any area where it would not have been better. Obviously the NHS would have been fully funded for starters. Britain's voters may be full of regrets but it's their own fault.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.