Dai Havard

Labour Party | Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney

Moving it up the Political Agenda!

Most lay people are squeamish about wounds - a drop of ‘claret’ and bandages on ‘Casualty’ or ‘ER’ is OK, but it’s not the real world. Ask any diabetic with foot ulcers or anyone dealing with the effects of traumatic injuries. Wound care has not traditionally been seen as the ‘sexiest’ end of the health care business but as practitioners and interested parties you will know how distorted and wrong that is.

In June this year I secured an Adjournment Debate in the UK Parliament which included calls for improved responses to would care and will have hosted a major reception in the House of Commons on the 19th October to continue my campaigning to promote wound care issues in Parliament and to the Department of Health.  There are many pressing priorities facing the NHS, but clearly wound care desperately needs moved up the political agenda.

During my Debate in June I described wound care as often being something Admiral Nelson might still recognise! Whilst that was in part said to gain attention for the issues and I know there have been significant developments in practices, medicines and technologies associated with wound care, in some part I am not wrong! We have processes in the modern NHS which recognise budgets for amputations but not budgets to fund modern technologies and alternatives. My concern is two-fold, I wish to see better efficiency of health delivery and spend in the NHS, but also better quality of patient care. What I see now are old fashioned responses which hinder both. How do we cost what is the most efficient and how do we value what is the best quality of care? We are at best confused.

We have the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the similar agencies in Scotland and Wales, evaluating the adoption of new medical technologies on the same basis as medicines. I fail to see how you can Random Blind Trial a vacuum pump – I suspect the patient might just spot it! There are absurdities in the system as well as a lack of ability to judge full and total worth of such interventions. We also have to face up to the internal barriers in and amongst clinicians and health managers in being willing to admit the value of different ways of doing, as well as ways of seeing the real value of new technologies and treatments and changing to accommodate them.

I have opposed many of the ‘managerial’ and ‘marketisation’ responses to the reform of the NHS but that does not mean I am not a champion of efficiency and change. It is our ability and willingness to see the real value and cost of modern practices and adopt them quickly that will help realise real value for patients and the economic efficiency and ‘payback’ we all want.
Wound care is a good example of a potential ‘virtuous circle’ of benefits. If patients are treated in modern ways with new technologies such as vacuum technologies - tissue management and treatment given to prevent and avoid hospitalisation - allowing individuals to self mange and remain in work – there is not only a better quality of care but a ‘liberation’ of resources. Others do not become or remain ‘carers’ patients do not become ‘claimants’, knowledge of care is improved and health and other resources used more efficiently - and even international standards achieved! 
 With approximately 30% of my constituents suffering from a long-term illness and an above average prevalence of diabetes in Merthyr Tydfil, I am well aware of the real value of your work and salute you for it.