[Metrobeans]

B440 - Healthcare Ratings System Bill 2012, TSR Government

Healthcare Ratings System Act 2012

An Act implementing a new standard rating system for all publicly owned healthcare establishments.

BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

1. New Healthcare Ratings System (HRS)
(1) A new rating system replaces any previous system of grading publicly owned healthcare facilities. The rating system is as follows-
Each variation of publicly owned healthcare establishment will be graded as below out of 10. The minimum score being 1, the maximum being 10.
Key
9 or 10= Excellent
7 or 8 = Good
5 or 6 = Satisfactory
3 or 4 = Poor
1 or 2 = Awful

Each different establishment will be graded on the categories shown below (some may vary, e.g. be present for GP surgeries but not Hospitals), and an average will be worked out to gain the total score.
Hospitals-Categories
• Standard of Patient Care in general wards
• Standard of Patient Care in specialist wards (where present)
• Cleanliness of general wards
• Cleanliness of specialist wards (e.g. cancer wards) (where present)
• Cleanliness of Operating Theatre (where operating theatre is present)
• Standard of food
• Patient satisfaction (to be assessed via a survey given to the family of the patient and the patient themselves, with an average then to be worked out)
• Standard of general equipment
• Standard of specialist equipment (where present)
• Attention given to staff safety in general wards
• Attention given to staff safety in specialist wards (e.g. radiation from chemotherapy, where present)
• Attention given to patient safety in general wards
• Attention given to patient safety in specialist wards (where present)
• Success rate of operations
• Standard of customer service (reception role/jobs)

GP Surgeries- Categories
• Standard of patient care
• Cleanliness of environment
• Accuracy of diagnosis’ (to be worked out by subtracting the number of cases which have been proved diagnosed wrong by another GP or hospital from the total number of diagnosis’ made at the GP surgery. This number will then be converted to a fraction /100)
• Standard of Customer service (reception jobs)

A new team of inspectors will be created from current inspectors of the health service in order to carry out these inspections. The team will be trained by a chief inspector, on what makes what grade, and will then grade each facility based on their opinion of how it adheres to said standards. These inspectors will then receive yearly refresher courses, in order to keep the standards expected fresh in their minds.

(2) For the purposes of this Act-
“GP Surgery” Refers to any surgery where only diagnoses are made, and no treatment is received. In dual hospital-surgery facilities, the two are rated separately
“Hospital” refers to any establishment where treatment is given for illnesses diagnosed by a GP Surgery
"Inspector" refers to somebody already employed by the NHS to inspect facilities.

2. Enforcement and Punishment
(1) The enforcement of this Act is the responsibility of the Health Department solely, and assessments will be carried out by trained Healthcare Inspectors. They will score out of 10 based on their opinion, but will be shown example scenarios with the scores they should receive during their training.
(2) Inspectors need give no warning of their arrival, they will simply show an official badge to the head of the facility and begin their inspection at once, so as to gain an impression of what the hospital is like on an everyday basis.
(3) The Secretary of State will be granted the power to make exemptions to this Act as he finds necessary by Order.

3. Commencement, short title and extent
(1) This Act may be cited as the Health Rating System Act 2012
(2) This bill shall extend to the United Kingdom; and
(3) Shall come into force immediately following Royal Assent.

[JPKC]

Nope. Unnecessary, arbitrary, simplistic, blunt. A 'points-based system' sounds snazzy but when you look into it there's no real need - assessing hospitals etc is far more detailed than just 1, 2, 3, 4... 10. There really would be absolutely nill point in changing, it just reflects a reluctance on the part of the SoS to learn and work with the current NICE-sponsored system. I'd appreciate it if the SoS at least attempted an explanation for his policy - why no notes?

[SciFiRory]

no.

healthcare, education, etc should not be about competing over simplistic ratings systems, they should be about providing the best service they can, and inspections should look at the big picture to improve all healthcare provision rather than it becoming like the awful disaster of School and University league tables.

[Mr Dangermouse]

What exactly happens to low performing hospitals?

[jesusandtequila]

Why? Let more patient choice and you don't need to bother with a central ratings system, but let people choose the option they prefer on the things they deem important, which are different for each individual.

No, more centralised bull****.

[WhatTheFunk]

not a fan of rating systems at all really, all for inspection from out side sources to make sure everything is running nice. But not rating them

[Maddog Jones]

Going to vote no. Equality, not marketisation.

[DebatingGreg]

No notes? Probably a no.

On the Enforcement and Punishement section, where's the punishment?

[Moleman1996]

(Original post by DebatingGreg)
No notes? Probably a no.

On the Enforcement and Punishement section, where's the punishment?

(Original post by Mr Dangermouse)
What exactly happens to low performing hospitals?

Missed that bit out Low performing hospitals would have more frequent inspections, and would be expected to improve. If said hospital did not improve, then the healtcare facility would be placed under the control of a new official, who would be expected to turn the standards around.

Anyone who is concerned that efficiency is put before patient care, this rating system is based almost entirely on patient care standards, and is a big step towards improving patient care.

[Moleman1996]

(Original post by WhatTheFunk)
not a fan of rating systems at all really, all for inspection from out side sources to make sure everything is running nice. But not rating them

Then how would said inspection be of any use without some sort of a system to adhere to when giving feedback?

[JPKC]

(Original post by Moleman1996)
Anyone who is concerned that efficiency is put before patient care, this rating system is based almost entirely on patient care standards, and is a big step towards improving patient care.

How? How? How?

[Moleman1996]

(Original post by JPKC)
How? How? How?

rating categories are all based around categories that effect patient care, and the wellbeing of the patient. That is the keystone of this system, the standard of patient care.

[JPKC]

(Original post by Moleman1996)
rating categories are all based around categories that effect patient care, and the wellbeing of the patient. That is the keystone of this system, the standard of patient care.

The current system is built around patient well being. Why would this staggered alternative be better?

[D.R.E]

As J&T said above, this bill is pointless where consumers are more or less tethered to their healthcare provider in the case of GPs, and where there is no reasonable way of 'enforcing or punishing' hospitals which fall below the standard. Open up the market and people be able to discriminate their healthcare providers in a much more sophisticated and efficient way than some arbitrary ratings.

Nay.

[WhatTheFunk]

(Original post by Moleman1996)
Then how would said inspection be of any use without some sort of a system to adhere to when giving feedback?

reports of improvement
rating stick in the mind too long, plus people only want to see and hear what they want to hear.
you only have to look at University one if Manchester uni falls down the table and Oxford Brooks rises people will still think Manchester is better

If a place stays at a low rating long enough it is hard to get rid of that view

[Moleman1996]

(Original post by JPKC)
The current system is built around patient well being. Why would this staggered alternative be better?

With the current systems, the rating is not easily understandable to the general public. Its overly complicated, and the facility can quite easily continue on with a poor rating.

[JPKC]

(Original post by Moleman1996)
With the current systems, the rating is not easily understandable to the general public. Its overly complicated, and the facility can quite easily continue on with a poor rating.

Do you have any evidence that this is the case, or is it just your own belief? At the moment it just seems as if you don't understand the current system and can't be bothered to get to grips with it.

[xXedixXx]

What's the current system?

[RoryS]

I do not agree with this rating system, so it's a no from me.

[Moleman1996]

(Original post by xXedixXx)
What's the current system?

For hospitals its rated Excellent, Good, Fair, Weak, Double Weak. But there is no real breakdown of results,a and other facilities are I believe rated differently. This brings in something that is universal, and a breakdown is very easy to see. It also makes it clearer what constitutes what, and to the general public, how far into said rating they are.

(Original post by JPKC)
Do you have any evidence that this is the case, or is it just your own belief? At the moment it just seems as if you don't understand the current system and can't be bothered to get to grips with it.

Its far more complicated, so common sense indicates something easier to understand and see a breakdown of would be better. Im sorry it seems that way, but I must ask why you didn't voice your concerns when I first brought up the idea in the government sub forum a few weeks ago. At this point you were a part of the coalition and had ample amount of time to make your opinion known.