1 / 11

Presentation to Boards 24 th September 2009

Presentation to Boards 24 th September 2009. Remit of the Clinical Leaders Forum.

overton
Download Presentation

Presentation to Boards 24 th September 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Presentation to Boards 24th September 2009

  2. Remit of the Clinical Leaders Forum • “To review the evidence in respect of the options and to make recommendations for the future pattern of clinically safe general hospital services, serving the populations of Shropshire, Telford & Wrekin, and the catchments of the provider organisations. • To consider options and make recommendations to Shrewsbury and Telford Executive Group of an overall picture of the future shape of hospital services, within the context of a modern NHS. To give early consideration to A&E services, services for children and also to cover maternity and neonatal services, emergency surgery and urology services.

  3. Principles • Making Sense Clinically • Health, Well Being and Equity • Quality, Safety And Effectiveness • Supporting and Developing the Workforce • Making Sense to the Communities We Serve • Involving People in Making Decisions about their future Health Services • Affordable, Sustainable, Fit for Purpose • Personalised Services and Access to Care, Closer to Home

  4. Engaging Patients, Public and Key Stakeholders • Membership of key groups • Workshops and Seminars • Roadshows • Briefings and Website • Criteria and Weightings • Scoring

  5. Programme of Work 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Defining the Problem Reconfigure Services to Address Safety Issues (2-3 years) Social, Governance and feasibility Assessments Implement Single Site for Seriously Ill and Injured Consultation – Single Site for Seriously Ill and Injured Developing the Clinical Options Consultation Option Appraisal Single Site ’08/09 2009 ’09/10 ’10–13 ’10-11 2012 ’13-’20 ‘07/08

  6. Phase 1: Key Strategic Issues

  7. Strategic Objectives: • The prevention of disease and the promotion of healthy lifestyles and independent living • Services at home or as close to home as possible • Sustainable and accessible acute hospital services

  8. Clinical Service Options: 3 - 4 Years (2012/13)

  9. Single Site (2020) Options • Baseline This will be the configuration of hospital services agreed for implementation in 2-3 years • Option 2 Under Option 2 the main A and E is based at RSH with outpatient, day case surgery, MIU, midwife unit and specialist community services at PRH • Option 3 Under Option 3 the main A and E is based at PRH with outpatient, day case surgery, MIU, midwife unit and specialist community services in RSH • Option 4 There will be a new acute hospital between Shrewsbury and Telford dealing with all seriously ill and injured patients. The sub options identify a number of possibilities for the two existing hospitals.

  10. Phase 3: Technical, Financial and Social Studies • 2012/13 Option Appraisal • 2020 Technical and Financial Feasibility Study • Equality and Diversity Impact Assessment

  11. Summary of Findings Phase 3 2012/13 Option Appraisal Option 1 scored more highly than the other options on non-financial implications, had the lowest capital cost and the shortest construction period. 2020 Feasibility Study All three options for the 2020 single site have the potential to be technically and financially feasible. Equality and Diversity Study The assessment concluded that while there are equality impacts associated with each of the proposals, there are none which differentiated between the options and no option emerges as having a more significant overall impact than others.

More Related