Staff and agencies 

Hospital loses £2.5m for treating patients too quickly

A debt-ridden NHS hospital has lost almost £2.5m after breaching an agreement with a local NHS body which said patients should wait at least four months for treatment.
  
  


A debt-ridden NHS hospital has lost almost £2.5m after breaching an agreement with a local NHS body which said patients should wait at least four months for treatment.

Doctors at Ipswich hospital, which is more than £16m in the red, breached the deal with Suffolk East Primary Care Trusts, which provides funds for treatment, because it treated patients too quickly.

The agreement had been designed to ensure patients were treated in turn and had similar waits.

Ipswich hospital today said it was working hard to ensure the mistake was not repeated. A spokeswoman described it as a "local glitch", and said there were no significant implications for the rest of the NHS.

She said the arrangement was thought to be the best way to ensure nobody jumped queues and everyone was waiting a similar length of time.

The government wants patients to wait no longer than six months before seeing a hospital consultant.

However, during the past two years doctors at Ipswich treated a number of patients inside four months in breach of the agreement, and the primary care trust refused to pay for that treatment.

The cost would instead come from the hospital's budget, adding to its financial difficulties, the spokeswoman said.

"We made the agreement on the waiting times since it was thought to be the best way of ensuring patients were seen on a first come, first served basis and that waiting times were equalised," she said.

"In a number of cases, we had breached the agreement - for understandable reasons, because we had spare capacity - and treated patients too quickly. The trusts refused to pay, as they were entitled to. We are working hard to ensure the mistake will not be made again.

"It's a complicated financial situation, effectively a local glitch, and does not have any national implications. The money will still come from the taxpayer, but from one purse, not another."

 

Leave a Comment

Required fields are marked *

*

*