CNS | 씨엔에스

• 목록
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Criticism of the National Health Service (England) consists of problems such as gain access to, waiting lists, healthcare coverage, and numerous scandals. The National Health Service (NHS) is the publicly funded healthcare system of England, created under the National Health Service Act 1946 by the post-war Labour government of Clement Attlee. It has actually come under much criticism, specifically throughout the early 2000s, due to break outs of antibiotic resistant infections such as MRSA and Clostridioides difficile infection, waiting lists, and medical scandals such as the Alder Hey organs scandal. However, the involvement of the NHS in scandals extends back numerous years, consisting of over the arrangement of mental healthcare in the 1970s and 1980s (ultimately part of the factor for the Mental Health Act 1983), and overspends on healthcare facility newbuilds, consisting of Guy's Hospital Phase III in London in 1985, the cost of which shot up from ₤ 29 million to ₤ 152 million. [1]

Access controls and waiting lists

In making healthcare a largely "invisible cost" to the client, health care appears to be successfully complimentary to its customers - there is no specific NHS tax or levy. To lower costs and ensure that everybody is treated equitably, there are a variety of "gatekeepers." The family doctor (GP) functions as a main gatekeeper - without a referral from a GP, it is often impossible to get higher courses of treatment, such as an appointment with an expert. These are argued to be needed - Welshman Bevan kept in mind in a 1948 speech in the House of Commons, "we shall never have all we require ... expectations will always surpass capacity". [2] On the other hand, the national health insurance coverage systems in other nations (e.g. Germany) have actually ignored the requirement for recommendation; direct access to a professional is possible there. [3]

There has actually been concern about opportunistic "health tourists" taking a trip to Britain (mainly London) and utilizing the NHS while paying nothing. [4] British residents have been understood to take a trip to other European countries to make the most of lower expenses, and due to the fact that of a worry of hospital-acquired super bugs and long waiting lists. [5]

NHS access is therefore controlled by medical priority instead of rate system, causing waiting lists for both consultations and surgical treatment, up to months long, although the Labour government of 1997-onwards made it among its essential targets to reduce waiting lists. In 1997, the waiting time for a non-urgent operation could be 2 years; there were ambitions to lower it to 18 weeks despite opposition from physicians. [6] It is objected to that this system is fairer - if a medical problem is intense and life-threatening, a client will reach the front of the line rapidly.

The NHS measures medical requirement in regards to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), a technique of quantifying the advantage of medical intervention. [7] It is argued that this technique of designating health care suggests some patients must lose out in order for others to get, and that QALY is a crude method of making life and death choices. [8]

Hospital got infections

There have actually been a number of fatal outbreaks of antibiotic resistant bacteria (" incredibly bugs") in NHS health centers, such as Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus and Clostridioides difficile infection. [9] This has actually caused criticism of standards of health throughout the NHS, with some patients purchasing personal health insurance coverage or travelling abroad to avoid the viewed threat of catching a "very bug" while in medical facility. However, the department of health pledged ₤ 50 million for a "deep tidy" of all NHS England hospitals in 2007. [10]

Coverage

The absence of schedule of some treatments due to their viewed bad cost-effectiveness often leads to what some call a "postcode lottery". [11] [12] The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) are the first gatekeeper, and examine the expense efficiency of all drugs. Until they have actually issued assistance on the cost and efficiency of brand-new or costly medications, treatments and procedures, NHS services are not likely to offer to money courses of treatment. The same of true of the Scottish Medicines Consortium, NICE's counterpart in Scotland. [13]

There has been significant debate about the general public health funding of pricey drugs, significantly Herceptin, due to its high cost and viewed minimal overall survival. The project waged by cancer sufferers to get the government to spend for their treatment has gone to the highest levels in the courts and the Cabinet to get it certified. [14] [15] The House of Commons Health Select Committee criticised some drug companies for bringing in drugs that cost on and around the ₤ 30,000 limitation that is thought about the optimum worth of one QALY in the NHS.