SaHF DMBC Volume 1 Edition 1.1.pdf - Shaping a healthier future

During consultation we sought feedback about the clinical standards. We wanted to
understand if people agreed with the proposed standards for care out of hospital and in
hospitals and if people had any suggestions for how the standards could be improved.
We asked people to questions about the standards in our consultation form. The first
question was:
Q4a. How far do you support or oppose the standards that have been agreed for care
outside of hospitals
4,598 people answered the question. Of these:
67% respondents answering this question support the standards that have been
agreed for care outside hospital
12% oppose these standards of care
21% had no view either way or were not sure/ didn‟t know.
We also asked people for their views on care in hospital. The second question we asked:
Q4b. How far do you support or oppose the standards that have been agreed for care
in hospital
4,540 people answered this question. Of these:
76% of respondents answering this question support the standards that have been
agreed for care in hospital
6% oppose these standards of care
18% had no view either way or were not sure/ didn‟t know.
In addition to this feedback we also received feedback from the following organisations:
Royal College of Surgeons
“Because of the importance of these standards [Commissioning Standards, published in
2012 by London Healthcare Programmes] for emergency surgical care, the College of
Surgeons has been represented on the North West London reconfiguration Board to ensure
that the principals of best practice in emergency surgical care will be strengthened and
improved by the chosen or preferred options for change…..At the present time, it is clear that
the surgical standards cannot be met with any consistency across North West London.”
Hillingdon LINk
“Concerned that the proposed “agreed Quality Standards for Hospital Care” contained within
the SaHF consultation document is far too vague and aspirational rather than offering
confirmed commitments to improving care standards…We are concerned that the proposed
“Quality Standards for care outside of Hospital” is far too vague, aspirational and lacking in
substance. This does not give us or the public the confidence that the SaHF will be able to
deliver on these commitments. This increases the risk that the SaHF will not be able to meet
savings required to deliver the hospital reconfigurations proposed in the consultation.”
9.5.4 The implications of this feedback on the clinical standards
During the consultation period London Health Programmes defined standards for care
across London, as indicated in the feedback above. These standards were agreed by the
London Clinical Senate and the GP Commissioning Council for local implementation. Local
9a. Decision making analysis stages 1 to 4 282