Linked Data API

Show Search Form

Search Results

164370
registered interest false more like this
date remove filter
answering body
Department of Health more like this
answering dept id 17 more like this
answering dept short name Health remove filter
answering dept sort name Health more like this
hansard heading Patients: Safety more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has to increase the use of patient experience surveys in the NHS to inform patient safety initiatives; and if he will make a statement. more like this
tabling member constituency Copeland more like this
tabling member printed
Mr Jamie Reed more like this
uin 215718 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2014-11-27more like thismore than 2014-11-27
answer text <p>Patient experience surveys are a valuable source of evidence and the results are used in a range of ways, including the assessment of National Health Service performance as well as in regulatory activities such as registration, monitoring ongoing compliance and reviews. The Care Quality Commission has developed a new Intelligent Monitoring tool to give inspectors a clear picture of the areas of care that need to be followed up within an NHS acute trust or a specialist NHS trust. The system is built on a set of indicators that look at a range of information including patient experience, staff experience and performance.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>In addition to the patient experience surveys hospital boards and other providers and commissioners of services can also consider the results of the Friends and Family Test (FFT) to consider the implications for quality and safety. While not a traditional survey, the FFT provides near real-time feedback to identify both good and poor quality patient experience. A NHS England review of the FFT found that it is performing well as a service improvement tool, with 85% of trusts reporting that it is being used to improve patient experience, and 78% saying that FFT has increased the emphasis placed on patient experience in their trusts.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>
answering member constituency Mid Norfolk more like this
answering member printed George Freeman more like this
question first answered
less than 2014-11-27T17:09:16.957Zmore like thismore than 2014-11-27T17:09:16.957Z
answering member
4020
label Biography information for George Freeman more like this
tabling member
1503
label Biography information for Mr Jamie Reed more like this
164371
registered interest false more like this
date remove filter
answering body
Department of Health more like this
answering dept id 17 more like this
answering dept short name Health remove filter
answering dept sort name Health more like this
hansard heading Patients: Safety more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the relationship between cost savings to the NHS and improved patient safety; and if he will make a statement. more like this
tabling member constituency Stockton North more like this
tabling member printed
Alex Cunningham more like this
uin 215712 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2014-11-27more like thismore than 2014-11-27
answer text <p>The Department commissioned Frontier Economics to investigate the costs of unsafe care in the National Health Service. The final report, <em>Exploring the cost of unsafe care</em> <em>in the NHS</em> suggests that the costs of preventable, adverse events is likely to be more than £1 billion per year, but could be up to £2.5 billion annually. The report, which was published on 16 October, is available at:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><a href="http://www.frontier-economics.com/publications/exploring-the-costs-of-unsafe-care-in-the-nhs/" target="_blank">http://www.frontier-economics.com/publications/exploring-the-costs-of-unsafe-care-in-the-nhs/</a></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Sign up to Safety campaign launched in June is now working with healthcare organisations to make the NHS one of the safest healthcare systems in the world and contribute to the goal to halve avoidable harm and save 6,000 lives over the next three years.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>It is difficult to disaggregate direct cash releasing savings from this evidence which must take into account the upfront costs of investing in safer care.</p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p>
answering member constituency Central Suffolk and North Ipswich more like this
answering member printed Dr Daniel Poulter more like this
question first answered
less than 2014-11-27T16:45:29.817Zmore like thismore than 2014-11-27T16:45:29.817Z
answering member
3932
label Biography information for Dr Dan Poulter more like this
tabling member
4122
label Biography information for Alex Cunningham more like this
164372
registered interest false more like this
date remove filter
answering body
Department of Health more like this
answering dept id 17 more like this
answering dept short name Health remove filter
answering dept sort name Health more like this
hansard heading Drugs: Licensing more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the contribution of 7 November 2014 by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health, Official Report, column 116, what the evidential basis is for the statement that the restraining factor is the lack of information for clinicians about off-label use. more like this
tabling member constituency East Antrim more like this
tabling member printed
Sammy Wilson more like this
uin 215692 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2014-12-01more like thismore than 2014-12-01
answer text <p>We know that new research evidence is being made available in healthcare all the time and that translating this into practice poses a number of challenges. We need to support clinicians in incorporating the most up to date and robust evidence into patient care and are in the process of setting up a round-table discussion with key stakeholders to look at how we can do that better in the case of off-label use of out-of-patent drugs.</p><p> </p> more like this
answering member constituency Mid Norfolk more like this
answering member printed George Freeman more like this
question first answered
less than 2014-12-01T17:12:05.533Zmore like thismore than 2014-12-01T17:12:05.533Z
answering member
4020
label Biography information for George Freeman more like this
tabling member
1593
label Biography information for Sammy Wilson more like this
164373
registered interest false more like this
date remove filter
answering body
Department of Health more like this
answering dept id 17 more like this
answering dept short name Health remove filter
answering dept sort name Health more like this
hansard heading NHS: Pay more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what proportion of NHS staff will receive a one per cent or higher pay award through non-consolidated increases or incremental pay awards this year. more like this
tabling member constituency Mid Worcestershire more like this
tabling member printed
Sir Peter Luff more like this
uin 215693 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2014-12-01more like thismore than 2014-12-01
answer text <p>All National Health Service staff who meet local performance standards will receive 1% or more pay through non-consolidated increases or incremental pay this year.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Just over 50% of staff are eligible for incremental pay progression subject to satisfactory performance, which averages a 3% rise.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The just under 50% of NHS staff who are at the top of their pay bands and therefore not eligible for incremental progression received an additional non-consolidated payment this year equal to 1% of basic pay.</p><p> </p> more like this
answering member constituency Central Suffolk and North Ipswich more like this
answering member printed Dr Daniel Poulter more like this
question first answered
less than 2014-12-01T17:11:00.333Zmore like thismore than 2014-12-01T17:11:00.333Z
answering member
3932
label Biography information for Dr Dan Poulter more like this
tabling member
268
label Biography information for Sir Peter Luff more like this
164374
registered interest false more like this
date remove filter
answering body
Department of Health more like this
answering dept id 17 more like this
answering dept short name Health remove filter
answering dept sort name Health more like this
hansard heading Cancer Drugs Fund more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans NHS England has to consult (a) charities and (b) patients during the two month notice period for de-prioritisation of drugs from the Cancer Drugs Fund list. more like this
tabling member constituency Basildon and Billericay more like this
tabling member printed
Mr John Baron more like this
uin 215687 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2014-12-01more like thismore than 2014-12-01
answer text <p>NHS England’s Cancer Drugs Fund panel plans to meet on 15 and 16 December to assess, on the basis of the latest evidence, whether certain drugs should continue to be made routinely available through the Fund and to consider a number of new drugs for potential addition to the Fund.</p><p> </p><p>NHS England has advised that a meeting will be held with representatives of charities and patient groups on 12 January 2015 to communicate the outcome of the panel’s discussion, clarify the process by which decisions were made and the rationale for these.</p><p> </p><p>This meeting will form part of the two month notice period prior to any drugs being formally removed from the national Cancer Drugs Fund list.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> more like this
answering member constituency Mid Norfolk more like this
answering member printed George Freeman more like this
grouped question UIN 215694 more like this
question first answered
less than 2014-12-01T17:07:34.42Zmore like thismore than 2014-12-01T17:07:34.42Z
answering member
4020
label Biography information for George Freeman more like this
tabling member
1390
label Biography information for Mr John Baron more like this
164375
registered interest false more like this
date remove filter
answering body
Department of Health more like this
answering dept id 17 more like this
answering dept short name Health remove filter
answering dept sort name Health more like this
hansard heading Health Services more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the Secretary of State for Health, which patient groups and patient representative organisations his Department consulted before publication of Personalised Health and Care 2020: a framework for action. more like this
tabling member constituency Copeland more like this
tabling member printed
Mr Jamie Reed more like this
uin 215651 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2014-11-27more like thismore than 2014-11-27
answer text <p>Input from patient and representative organisations was sought through the NHS England Citizen Engagement and INVOLVE networks. No formal consultation exercise was conducted.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Members from these groups participated in a facilitated workshop, offering insight and the opportunity for patient and public input to a series of developing outcomes which now form the key proposals within the Framework.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Framework was socialised with The Richmond Group of Charities as part of a subject/sector specific ‘critical review panel’, the feedback from which helped shape onward drafting.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> more like this
answering member constituency Mid Norfolk more like this
answering member printed George Freeman more like this
question first answered
less than 2014-11-27T17:20:26.827Zmore like thismore than 2014-11-27T17:20:26.827Z
answering member
4020
label Biography information for George Freeman more like this
tabling member
1503
label Biography information for Mr Jamie Reed more like this
164376
registered interest false more like this
date remove filter
answering body
Department of Health more like this
answering dept id 17 more like this
answering dept short name Health remove filter
answering dept sort name Health more like this
hansard heading Cancer Drugs Fund more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what discussions he and Ministers in his Department have had with NHS England about the implications for re-evaluating the Cancer Drugs Fund list on breast cancer patients; what the content of those discussions was; and if he will make a statement. more like this
tabling member constituency Basildon and Billericay more like this
tabling member printed
Mr John Baron more like this
uin 215686 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2014-12-01more like thismore than 2014-12-01
answer text <p>Ministers have had no such discussions. Departmental officials have had discussions with NHS England regarding the changes NHS England has made to the standard operating procedures for the Cancer Drugs Fund. These discussions have not focussed on the potential impact of these changes on drugs available for specific types of cancer.</p><p> </p><p>NHS England has assured the Department that no patient whose treatment is currently being funded through the Fund will have funding withdrawn, as long as it is clinically appropriate that they continue to receive that treatment. In addition, no drug will be removed from the Fund where it was the only therapy for that condition and doctors will be able to apply for particular drugs by exception.</p><p> </p> more like this
answering member constituency Mid Norfolk more like this
answering member printed George Freeman more like this
question first answered
less than 2014-12-01T17:04:23.873Zmore like thismore than 2014-12-01T17:04:23.873Z
answering member
4020
label Biography information for George Freeman more like this
tabling member
1390
label Biography information for Mr John Baron more like this
164377
registered interest false more like this
date remove filter
answering body
Department of Health more like this
answering dept id 17 more like this
answering dept short name Health remove filter
answering dept sort name Health more like this
hansard heading IVF more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what recent assessment he has made of the feasibility of transposition of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Quality Standard on Fertility into a Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) outcome indicator as a means of encouraging adherence to NICE's recommendation that all CCGs should fund three full cycles of IVF for eligible couples. more like this
tabling member constituency Chesterfield more like this
tabling member printed
Toby Perkins more like this
uin 215676 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2014-12-01more like thismore than 2014-12-01
answer text <p>The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is responsible for making recommendations to NHS England on potential indicators for inclusion in the Clinical Commissioning Group Outcomes Indicator Set (CCG OIS) based on its published quality standards. NICE’s processes for developing potential indicators, based on its quality standards, include consideration by an independent advisory committee and public consultation. Assessment of the feasibility of turning this quality standard into an indicator would therefore rest with NICE. Indicators recommended by the NICE advisory committee are then considered by NHS England for inclusion in the CCG OIS.</p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p>The Department and NHS England expects all those involved in commissioning infertility treatment services to be fully aware of the importance of having regard to the NICE fertility guidelines.</p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p> more like this
answering member constituency Battersea more like this
answering member printed Jane Ellison more like this
question first answered
less than 2014-12-01T17:23:53.107Zmore like thismore than 2014-12-01T17:23:53.107Z
answering member
3918
label Biography information for Jane Ellison more like this
tabling member
3952
label Biography information for Mr Toby Perkins more like this
164378
registered interest false more like this
date remove filter
answering body
Department of Health more like this
answering dept id 17 more like this
answering dept short name Health remove filter
answering dept sort name Health more like this
hansard heading Pneumococcal Disease: Vaccination more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 11 November 2014 to Question 213785, what the terms of reference are for the Pneumococcal sub-committee's review; if he will place in the Library a copy of the terms of reference of that review; and if he will make a statement. more like this
tabling member constituency Chelmsford more like this
tabling member printed
Mr Simon Burns more like this
uin 215649 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2014-11-27more like thismore than 2014-11-27
answer text <p>The terms of reference for the pneumococcal subcommittee of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) will be agreed at its first meeting, to be held in spring 2015.</p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p>Once agreed, the terms of reference will be published in the minutes of the sub-committee meeting and available for public access on the gov.uk website.</p><p> </p> more like this
answering member constituency Battersea more like this
answering member printed Jane Ellison more like this
question first answered
less than 2014-11-27T17:27:30.297Zmore like thismore than 2014-11-27T17:27:30.297Z
answering member
3918
label Biography information for Jane Ellison more like this
tabling member
46
label Biography information for Sir Simon Burns more like this
164380
registered interest false more like this
date remove filter
answering body
Department of Health more like this
answering dept id 17 more like this
answering dept short name Health remove filter
answering dept sort name Health more like this
hansard heading Patients: Safety more like this
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
question text To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the rates of (a) pulmonary embolism, (b) blood-stream infection and (c) foreign body left in after procedure has been in England in each year since 2000. more like this
tabling member constituency Wolverhampton South West more like this
tabling member printed
Paul Uppal more like this
uin 215682 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2014-12-01more like thismore than 2014-12-01
answer text <p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p>The Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC) has provided data on (a) a count of finished admission episodes (FAEs) where there was a primary diagnosis of pulmonary embolism and the number of FAEs as a rate per 100,000 of the total number of FAEs and (b) a count of finished consultant episodes (FCEs) with a primary or secondary diagnosis of pulmonary embolism and the number of FCEs as a rate per 100,000 of the total number FCEs, for the years 2000-01 to 2012-13.</p><p> </p><p>This is summarised in the following table:</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Year</p></td><td><p>FAEs with primary diagnosis of &quot;pulmonary embolism&quot;</p></td><td><p>Rate per 100,000 of total FAEs</p></td><td><p>FCEs with primary or secondary diagnosis of &quot;pulmonary embolism&quot;</p></td><td><p>Rate per 100,000 of total FCEs</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2000-01</p></td><td><p>15,179</p></td><td><p>136.5</p></td><td><p>32,937</p></td><td><p>268.6</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2001-02</p></td><td><p>14,735</p></td><td><p>133.0</p></td><td><p>33,537</p></td><td><p>271.8</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2002-03</p></td><td><p>15,536</p></td><td><p>136.6</p></td><td><p>37,093</p></td><td><p>291.8</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2003-04</p></td><td><p>16,095</p></td><td><p>136.3</p></td><td><p>39,196</p></td><td><p>294.8</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2004-05</p></td><td><p>15,621</p></td><td><p>129.1</p></td><td><p>40,059</p></td><td><p>292.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2005-06</p></td><td><p>16,347</p></td><td><p>128.9</p></td><td><p>43,360</p></td><td><p>300.6</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2006-07</p></td><td><p>16,629</p></td><td><p>128.1</p></td><td><p>46,685</p></td><td><p>315.8</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2007-08</p></td><td><p>16,948</p></td><td><p>125.7</p></td><td><p>49,114</p></td><td><p>319.8</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2008-09</p></td><td><p>18,214</p></td><td><p>128.7</p></td><td><p>56,029</p></td><td><p>345.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009-10</p></td><td><p>19,763</p></td><td><p>135.9</p></td><td><p>62,367</p></td><td><p>371.1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010-11</p></td><td><p>20,908</p></td><td><p>140.4</p></td><td><p>67,477</p></td><td><p>390.7</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011-12</p></td><td><p>21,525</p></td><td><p>143.3</p></td><td><p>70,466</p></td><td><p>403.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012-13</p></td><td><p>23,578</p></td><td><p>155.7</p></td><td><p>79,058</p></td><td><p>446.3</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Public Health England (PHE) collects data on blood stream infections caused by bacteria (bacteraemia) relating to specific organisms as part of its mandatory Healthcare Associated Infection surveillance programmes.</p><p> </p><p>Microbiology laboratories in England, Wales and Northern Ireland also voluntarily submit data to PHE relating to episodes of bacteraemia and blood stream infections caused by fungi (fungaemia).</p><p> </p><p>The data summarised in Tables 1-3, taken from PHE’s mandatory surveillance programmes, represent bacteraemia cases reported in England resulting from: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA); Methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) and E.coli where comparable data is available. Rates of all reported cases per 100,000 population are included, where available.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="8"><p>Table 1a: All reported cases of MRSA bacteraemia (April 2007-March 2014)</p><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Financial year</p></td><td><p>April 2007 to March 2008</p></td><td><p>April 2008 to March 2009</p></td><td><p>April 2009 to March 2010</p></td><td><p>April 2010 to March 2011</p></td><td><p>April 2011 to March 2012</p></td><td><p>April 2012 to March 2013</p></td><td><p>April 2013 to March 2014</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Count</p></td><td><p>4,451</p></td><td><p>2,935</p></td><td><p>1,898</p></td><td><p>1,481</p></td><td><p>1,116</p></td><td><p>924</p></td><td><p>862</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Rate per 100,000 population</p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p>3.6</p></td><td><p>2.8</p></td><td><p>2.1</p></td><td><p>1.7</p></td><td><p>1.6</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p><em>Note: </em>Data is available at: <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/mrsa-bacteraemia-annual-data" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/mrsa-bacteraemia-annual-data</a></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="4"><p>Table 2: All reported cases of MSSA bacteraemia (April 2011 - March 2014)</p><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Financial year</p></td><td><p>April 2011 to March 2012</p></td><td><p>April 2012 to March 2013</p></td><td><p>April 2013 to March 2014</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Count</p></td><td><p>8,767</p></td><td><p>8,812</p></td><td><p>9,290</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Rate per 100,000 population</p></td><td><p>16.5</p></td><td><p>16.5</p></td><td><p>17.4</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p><em>Note: </em>Data is available at: <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/mssa-bacteraemia-annual-data" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/mssa-bacteraemia-annual-data</a></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="3"><p>Table 3: All reported cases of <em>E. coli </em>bacteraemia (April 2012-March 2014)</p><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Financial year</p></td><td><p>April 2012 to March 2013</p></td><td><p>April 2013 to March 2014</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Count</p></td><td><p>32,309</p></td><td><p>34,275</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Rate per 100,000 population</p></td><td><p>60.4</p></td><td><p>64.1</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p><em>Note: </em>Data is available at: <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/escherichia-coli-e-coli-bacteraemia-annual-data" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/escherichia-coli-e-coli-bacteraemia-annual-data</a></p><p> </p><p>The data summarised in Table 4, taken from PHE’s voluntary surveillance database, represents all voluntarily reported patient episodes involving either bacteraemia and/or fungaemia for the period of January 2008 to December 2012 in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6"><p>Table 4: Patient episodes involving either bacteraemia and/or fungaemia 2008-2012, England, Wales and Northern Ireland</p><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Calendar Year</p></td><td><p>2008</p></td><td><p>2009</p></td><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>2012</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Count</p></td><td><p>95,931</p></td><td><p>94,190</p></td><td><p>92,867</p></td><td><p>94,166</p></td><td><p>95,647</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p><em>Note: </em>Data extracted from the Public Health England (PHE) voluntary surveillance database, LabBase2, on 3 December 2013.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Before 2009, information was not collated on foreign bodies retained after procedures (which is classed as a ‘never event’) and so we are unable to provide data for the period prior to 2009.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>In 2009-10, there were nine retained foreign objects post procedure reported during this period.</p><p> </p><p>In 2010-11, there were 67 retained foreign object never events reported to Strategic Executive Information System (STEIS) and 22 reported to the National Reporting and Learning Service (NRLS).</p><p> </p><p>In 2011-12, there were 161 retained foreign object never events reported to STEIS and 86 reported to the NRLS in 2011-12.</p><p> </p><p>In 2012-13, there were 130 retained foreign object never events reported to STEIS and 124 reported to the NRLS in 2012-13 (please note incidents are potentially reported to both systems but the exact degree of overlap of reported incidents during the period 2010-11 and 2011-12 is unclear).</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Since April 2013 reports made to the NRLS and STEIS have been directly reconciled to provide a single total and provisional data published by NHS England shows 123 retained object never events were reported in 2013-14 and 44 in the six months to September 2014:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><a href="http://www.england.nhs.uk/ourwork/patientsafety/never-events/ne-data/" target="_blank">http://www.england.nhs.uk/ourwork/patientsafety/never-events/ne-data/</a></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Methods for identifying and collating the data from two systems (NRLS and STEIS) have changed over the years, with specific reporting fields for Never events replacing keyword searches, and year-end attempts to reconcile events reported in both systems replaced with direct communication as and when incidents were reported. This is a further reason why events from the earlier years are not directly comparable. The numbers of Never Events reported for 2010-11 and 2011-12 were reported in Annex A of the ‘<em>The never events policy framework: An update to the never events policy</em>’</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/213046/never-events-policy-framework-update-to-policy.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/213046/never-events-policy-framework-update-to-policy.pdf</a></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>It should be noted that the updated policy expanded the list of never events from 8 to 25 in 2012 and the detail of definitions of retained foreign objects was also clarified in The never events list; 2013/14 update:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><a href="http://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/nev-ev-list-1314-clar.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/nev-ev-list-1314-clar.pdf</a>.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Note numbers in different years are not directly comparable due to these definitional changes.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p>
answering member constituency Central Suffolk and North Ipswich more like this
answering member printed Dr Daniel Poulter more like this
question first answered
less than 2014-12-01T17:19:54.637Zmore like thismore than 2014-12-01T17:19:54.637Z
answering member
3932
label Biography information for Dr Dan Poulter more like this
tabling member
4078
label Biography information for Paul Uppal more like this