Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 61 replies
  • Subscribers 9 subscribers
  • Views 1904 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Is technology killing the NHS?

Arran Cameron
I'm sorry if this comes across as pessimistic but I believe that the NHS will die unless seriously intelligent reforms are made to it. These reforms will probably not be possible because of inertia in the system. What happened to Stafford Hospital is a snapshot of what will come to other NHS trusts.


When the NHS was established in the 1940s, technology in hospitals was far simpler. In many cases medical procedures were carried out using simple hand tools. The most complicated piece of equipment in a hospital was probably an X-Ray machine. A modern hospital contains tens of thousands of pieces of advanced machinery.


This costs a large amount of money to buy.

This costs a large amount of money to maintain and service.

This costs a large amount of money to provide staff training.


The amount of money spent by hospitals on advanced medical devices and IT equipment keeps increasing year after year and is a substantial part of the NHS budget.


If this isn't bad enough in itself, the NHS is not very good when it comes to using and deploying technology due to its cumbersome and antiquated management structure along with the mentality of a high proportion of its staff. The NHS is clearly not a visionary and progressive organisation.


Only a small fraction of medical devices are specifically designed for the NHS. A high proportion of them are off the shelf products primarily designed for the US healthcare market.


The situation is marginally better with software although NHS IT projects are known to have been expensive disasters.


Therefore, is technology killing the NHS?
Parents
  • 0
    It doesn't appear that technology is to blame - staff employed has risen, while capital spending has fallen at a greater rate and the estimated maintenance backlog now exceeds the total capital budget. According to the Health Foundation, an independent charity committed to bringing about better health and health care for people in the UK:

    • ''An internationally recognised way of tracking capital spending is the spend per head of the workforce. This estimates the amount of additional resources that are available per worker, which may lead to a more productive workforce. With the number of whole-time-equivalent (WTE) staff employed rising by 6% between 2013/14 and 2016/17, capital spending per WTE fell by 23% – an average of 9% a year. 

    • Data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) show that capital spending for health care, such as for hospitals and equipment, in the UK is low compared with other OECD countries, at 0.3% of GDP compared with an average of 0.5%. Increasing spending to the OECD average would mean an additional £3bn would be available for investment in health capital across the UK.

    • Falling capital spending impacts provider finances and service delivery. It limits the ability of NHS trusts to purchase new equipment, and to make repairs and maintenance to current facilities. In 2016/17, there was an estimated maintenance backlog of £5.6bn, up from £5.2bn in 2015/16. This was greater than the total capital budget."


    To learn more about the funding pressures on the NHS read this report.
Reply
  • 0
    It doesn't appear that technology is to blame - staff employed has risen, while capital spending has fallen at a greater rate and the estimated maintenance backlog now exceeds the total capital budget. According to the Health Foundation, an independent charity committed to bringing about better health and health care for people in the UK:

    • ''An internationally recognised way of tracking capital spending is the spend per head of the workforce. This estimates the amount of additional resources that are available per worker, which may lead to a more productive workforce. With the number of whole-time-equivalent (WTE) staff employed rising by 6% between 2013/14 and 2016/17, capital spending per WTE fell by 23% – an average of 9% a year. 

    • Data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) show that capital spending for health care, such as for hospitals and equipment, in the UK is low compared with other OECD countries, at 0.3% of GDP compared with an average of 0.5%. Increasing spending to the OECD average would mean an additional £3bn would be available for investment in health capital across the UK.

    • Falling capital spending impacts provider finances and service delivery. It limits the ability of NHS trusts to purchase new equipment, and to make repairs and maintenance to current facilities. In 2016/17, there was an estimated maintenance backlog of £5.6bn, up from £5.2bn in 2015/16. This was greater than the total capital budget."


    To learn more about the funding pressures on the NHS read this report.
Children
No Data

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines