Recently in NHS Category

The cost of separating mental and physical healthcare

user-pic
| No Comments
There's an interesting report out today from the King's Fund about the costs (to patients and the NHS) of treating physical and mental health problems separately given the large number of people with long-term conditions who also have mental illnesses.

It finds 46% of people with mental health problems have a long-term condition and 30% of people with a long-term condition have a mental health problem, amounting to 4.6m people.

However, the report says: "A separation of mental and physical health is hard-wired into institutional arrangements, payment systems and professional training curricula. As a result, co-morbid mental health problems commonly go undetected among people with long-term conditions, and where problems are detected the support provided is often not effectively linked or co-ordinated with care provided for physical problems."

The result is poorer patient outcomes and significant cost to the NHS and the wider economy. What's worse is that people with these co-morbidities are disproportionately found in deprived areas, where they lack access to services and resources.

The report has some interesting ideas for bridging the gap:
  • Greater involvement of mental health specialists in primary care.
  • Much greater investment in liaison psychiatry services in acute hospitals to identify people with mental health problems.
  • Training for physical healthcare staff in basic mental healthcare.

There is less about the role of social care professionals in this report, beyond stating that they have a role to play, particularly in relation to people with dementia and long-term conditions.

It would be good for this to be fleshed out as social workers and other care professionals have a crucial role in identifying people with co-morbidities, taking a holistic view of their condition and co-ordinating their support. Hopefully, this is something that can be addressed.

Have your say on Mental Health Act stats

user-pic
| No Comments
To state the obvious, there are few more significant statutory interventions than the use of compulsory powers under the Mental Health Act, and one concerning trend in the last couple of years has been the rising use of these powers.

All of this means that how information is collected in relation to the use of these powers is of vital importance, so it's worth putting away any aversion to statistics and responding to a consultation on this topic from the NHS Information Centre.

This is looking at the case for scrapping the existing standalone data collection on Mental Health Act powers (or KP90 to its friends) and instead collecting this information instead through the Mental Health Minimum Dataset (MHMD), which collects a host of other data about the use of specialist mental healthcare.

As I understand it, the key advantages of the change are:-
  • Better information about the care pathways taken by people detained under the Act or placed on community treatment orders and about how long people are detained. Information on this could help improve the commissioning and design of services in local areas.
  • Breaking down the use of compulsory powers under the Act by employment status, diagnosis and, crucially, ethnicity, rather than just gender, as the KP90 collection currently does.

So it's worth answering the consultation questionnaire if you get a moment.

How important are relationships to bringing health and social care together?

user-pic
| No Comments

Good Guardian piece this morning about bringing together health and social care from Pollyanna Perkins, aka a "director of adult social care for a large local authority".

Here's the secret of success in her view: "It's all about relationships, co-working, shared caseloads, but most importantly it's about individual clinicians and managers understanding the whole system - and not just their bit of it - on both sides of the house."

She then cites experience of this working in her area and now social workers are having daily virtual meetings with health colleagues to discuss older people on their joint caseloads.

What good joint working isn't about she says is structural change.

This is a particularly good articulation of a longstanding position. However, it often seems to me that for every person who makes the argument that good joint working is all about relationships, you will find another who will say that dependency on relationships is a dangerous thing. That when people move on, good joint working moves on with them.
We linked to a blog articulating this position from consultancy iMPOWER recently, which made the case for some level of structural change to secure joint working against dependency on particular individuals.

I am sure there is something in both these positions.
That you need strong relationships and also some rules in place to ensure security when people move on.

The secret to both appears to be strong leadership - a point made by Pollyanna Perkins - so the question is whether those leaders are working in local government and the NHS today or not. And if they are, what happens when they move on?

Integration of health and social care take 20 - will it work this time?

user-pic
| No Comments

Another day, another report on integration for the government, this time from the NHS Future Forum (the advisory body set up to inject common sense into the government's NHS reforms).

The proposals are pretty similar to those put out in last week's report from think-tanks the King's Fund and the Nuffield Trust: strong support for social care and the NHS to be measured against the same performance indicators, for pooling budgets and commissioning and for building services around patients' needs.

Notably, for professionals, there is a call for every person with long-term conditions to have a named care co-ordinator, who could be a social worker.

The government has, largely, accepted the proposals.

However, the question is, will this work where other initiatives to do the same over previous decades have not? 

Social care academic Bob Hudson thinks not, in a powerful piece for The Guardian today, in which he argues that the whole issue is being looked at from an NHS perspective (with adult social care seen as the "handmaiden" to the health service), weakening its potential impact.

More significantly, he says the agenda amounts to yet more exhortation for health and social care organisations to integrate - precisely the approach that has failed for 40 years, he says.

Also, he notes the big tension in the government's NHS reforms between competition for business between providers and integration of care pathways for patients.

Not an easy square to circle, he says.

I fear we may be revisiting this topic with another mountain of reports in years to come.

(Added 13 January: Just spotted this blog post from social worker and psychotherapist Claudia Megele about the government's integration plans, which raises important concerns about the compatibility of these with other government actions, such as the injection of greater competition into healthcare through the Health and Social Care Bill).

Is Cameron really ordering a merger of health and social care?

user-pic
| No Comments
Cameron by bisgovuk.jpg
Is David Cameron really ordering the merger of health and social care as a headline in today's Guardian claims?

It seems unlikely, as the story below the headline makes clear.

The PM has apparently been convinced of the benefits of more integration for patient/service user outcomes and the public purse.

A report out today for the Department of Health makes the case for integration to better support adults and children with long-term conditions and disabilities. As the study is by the two top health think-tanks, the Nuffield Trust and King's Fund, it is bound to carry influence.

But in its first paragraph it says, resolutely, that it's proposals can be delivered "without further legislative change or structural upheaval". That is to say, integration of care does not entail merger of organisations.

A number of the ideas in the paper are not new, such as people with long-term conditions having an entitlement to a joint health and social care plan, co-ordinated by a case manager (the 2006 Our Health, Our Care, Our Say White Paper under Labour carried a similar proposal).

The last health secretary to "order" merger was Alan Milburn in 2001 when he proposed the universal roll out of care trusts to integrate the commissioning and delivery of adult social care and health. He had to pull back from mandating it and, since this point, a consensus has developed across policymakers and sector leaders, that structural change is not the route to integration; rather, it is about setting joint outcomes for health and social care bodies, pooling resources and building care around the needs of patients and service users.

However, progress on these fronts has been patchy and ensuring that it can be accelerated is the big challenge for government and the sectors. It's unlikely that ordered mergers - in whatever form - is likely to form part of the answer.

(Image on Flickr from bisgovuk)

New NHS operating framework looks to boost talking therapies

user-pic
| No Comments
The new NHS operating framework has been published today with some interesting things to say about mental health and specifically on boosting talking therapy rollout.

It says that not only is greater integration needed in the NHS between health and social care but across primary and secondary healthcare between mental and physical health.

It also says that for 2012/13 particular focus is needed on improving:
  • access to psychological therapies as part of the commitment to full rollout by 2014/15 so that services remain on track to meet at least 15% of disorder prevalence, with a recovery rate of at least 50% in fully established services. This will also mean increased access for black and minority ethnic groups and older people, and increased availability of psychological therapies for people with severe mental illness and long term health problems;
  • the physical healthcare of those with mental illness to reduce their excess mortality;
  • offender health, working in partnership with the National Offender Management Service; and
  • targeted support for children and young people at particular risk of developing mental health problems, such as looked after children.
The Operating Framework for the NHS in England 2012/13 describes the national priorities, system levers and enablers needed for NHS organisations to maintain and improve the quality of services provided, while delivering transformational change and maintaining financial stability.

Care providers lose out in challenge to NHS continuing care funding

user-pic
| No Comments
Care providers from across the East Midlands and the North West have failed in their challenge to PCTs on their funding of continuing care.
Provider associations had taken a case to the NHS Co-operation and Competition Panel that, among other things, the PCTs had operated a procurement process that set prices too low for continuing care, forcing good providers out of the market.
This was alleged to have breached the principles and rules for co-operation and competition, which are upheld by the panel and are designed to ensure that markets for the provision of NHS-funded services are fair.
However, the panel ruled that the payment regimes operated by the PCTs were fair.

DH calls for information on spend of transferred PCT money

user-pic
| No Comments
What areas of social care are being funded by primary care trust money specifically transferred to local authorities for 2011/12?

This is the latest missive from the Men from the Ministry - aka the Department of Health - to look at how well and on what the £648m that was transferred from PCTs to local authorities is being spent.

Readers will remember that the department ruled transfer had to be on something in social care that would also benefit health and that this had to be agreed by both parties.

It helpfully drew up a list of suggestions such as prevention services, telecare, re-ablement and mental health.

It appears the transfer has gone quite smoothly, suggesting that health isn't retreating to its silo just yet. Interestingly the letter, which is from David Behan, social care director-general and David Flory, deputy NHS chief executive, says the information is required to help set up a mechanism for allocating social care funding for 2013/14 and 2014/15. 

Lansley accused of 'insulting' service user leaders

user-pic
| No Comments
lansley.jpg
Ouch! Poor old Andrew Lansley has been in the wars.
Earlier today he announced that 75 areas will pilot HealthWatch, the government's latest vehicle for involving service users and patients in scrutinising care services, providing a "stronger voice for patients".

The pilot organisations will be existing Local Involvement Networks (LINks), the latest in a long line of bodies to involve patients in the health service and the first to have social care tagged on to their responsibilities (something that their local HealthWatch successors will continue).

Anyway, far from welcoming the move, the body representing LINks - the National Association of LINks Members (NALM) - has slammed Lansley for providing the HealthWatch pilots with no funding.

"LINks are run by volunteers and have a major role in monitoring the quality and safety of NHS and social care services from a user's and patient's viewpoint.  To expect them to run successful pathfinders with no additional money is frankly insulting to the excellent and committed volunteers across the country, who strive to make LINks a success," said NALM chair Malcolm Alexander.


The reason is this is important is that HealthWatch is at the heart of the government's plans to make local authorities and care services accountable down to their populations and service users for the quality of care, rather than accountable up to government. It is this that explains ministers' decision to scrap the Care Quality Commission's annual performance assessment of councils on adult social care last year.

Alexander has called on Lansley to fund the pilots (or pathfinders as I should call them). Lansley will almost certainly not agree, all of which means that the era of bottom-up accountability in the health and social care systems could still be a long way away.

(Image on Flickr from NHS Confederation)

Helping GPs protect vulnerable adults from abuse

user-pic
| No Comments
Out today is a guide to safeguarding vulnerable adults for GPs, courtesy of the British Medical Association.
It's pretty fundamental stuff with information on identifying risk, the existence of multi-agency safeguarding procedures and when to refer to council adult protection teams. Hopefully it should be of use.

About the Adult Care blog

   
 

The Adult Care blog looks behind the policies, practices and personalities involved in the care of older and disabled people for any hidden truths, helpful tips or humour.

It is written by Community Care’s adults’ services beat editor Mithran Samuel.

Adult Care blog home

  Follow the Adult team on 

Twitter Follow the adults team on Twitter
     

How to get in touch

     
  Email: Mithran Samuel

 

More from Community Care

 

 

Subscribe by E-mail

 

 

 
You Care Residential and domiciliary care zone
   

Twitter

 

Other blogs we like

Facebook

Community Care on Facebook

 

----------Advertisement----------