The report of the Head of Scrutiny and Member
Development informed Members of the contact that had been made with
the JCPCT and the Safe and Sustainable
Team. As had been previously reported,
there would be no representation from the JCPCT or Safe and Sustainable team at this
meeting.
Cathy Edwards of the Yorkshire and Humber
Specialised Commissioning Group (SCG)
was in attendance for this item and gave the Committee an overview
of some of the work that had been recently published in respect of
the review for children’s congenital heart services, namely
the Health Impact Assessment and the IPSOS Mori public consultation. Further issues reported included the
following:
- All trusts had been asked to report
on capacity planning and any constraints or restraints there would
be from taking n additional work.
- Analysis of how much work Leeds
would take from other areas was now being analysed and would be fed
to the JCPCT in October or
November.
- Work surrounding the Central Cardiac
Audit Database – this gave more up to date figures on the
likely number of procedures to be carried out.
- Work that was currently being
carried out by Price, Waterhouse & Cooper in respect of patient
flow. This looked at 18 postcode areas
nationally, 8 of which were in Yorkshire and the
Humber. This information would be fed
to the JCPCT in November.
- The judicial review relating to
Royal Brompton Hospital – an initial hearing had been held
and there was to be a full hearing in September.
- There was an expectation of
responses from Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s to submit
responses by 5 October to be fed into the JCPCT meetings in October and November.
- The Clinical Advisory Group was to
meet in September and would be looking at Children’s Cardiac
Services and Co-location.
In response to Members comments and questions,
the following issues were discussed:
- The JCPCT was due to meet on 25 October and 17 November
when the final decision on the options was exected.
- It was felt to be unacceptable that
the scrutiny responses had to be submitted by 5 October when
information such as the patient flow analysis had not yet been
completed. An interim report on this
was due in the last week of September.
- The review of the impact on other
services at Royal Brompton was being carried out due to the
judicial review and to look at the overall sustainability of the
hospital.
- The results of the patient flow
analysis were critical to the Yorkshire and Humber region as all
the other options would increase travelling time for the majority
of residents. It was felt that to not
have this information this was against the interest of open and
accountable decision making.
- If the Judicial Review ruled in
favour of Royal Brompton Hospital it was likely that the whole
process would have to be reconsidered.
- It was felt that the process was
flawed when information such as the patient flow analysis was not
available. This could have significant
impact on the options available and other options may have been
developed in light of this knowledge.
- The Yorkshire and Humberside
SCG had previously expressed concerns
regarding the assumptions on projected numbers, as had other
SCGs across the country, and this was
part of the reason that the work on patient flow analysis was being
carried out. It was regrettable that
this information was not yet available.
- The basis for a centre to have the
capacity to carry out 400 procedures a year was a clinical
decision. It was also based on
requiring 4 surgeons, one of which would be available 24 hours a
day all year round.
- The JCPCT meeting in November was planned to be held
publicly.
- Any organisation could seek judicial
review and there were other methods of appeal including going to an
Independent Review Panel.
- There was a strong argument that
Leeds should have been given more consideration on population
density. 14 million people live within
a 2 hour drive of the city.
RESOLVED – That the
report and discussion be noted.