Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE USE OF Coast Guard helicopter Rescue 117 in past days to transfer a heart attack patient from University Hospital Waterford (UHW) to Cork University Hospital yet again demonstrates the need for a 24/7 cardiac service in the southeast region.
The transfer times alone are far in excess of the clinical standard, given the need for aircraft re-tasking and the requirement to access non hospital campus landing sites due to the aircraft size. This contributes to excessive treatment delay and suboptimal health outcomes.
The contracted Coast Guard helicopter service (5 Sikorsky S-92s) costs the state 68 million euro annually – 13.6 million each. This figure rises with a higher volume of hospital transfer flights requested.
Air and sea rescue service is not always on station
It also means a service tasked for air and sea rescue is not on station in the southeast when charged with hospital patient transfers, a sobering thought given summer holiday season and the increased activity in water based leisure pursuits.
The additional running cost of a 24/7 Regional Cardiac Care Service at UHW has been assessed at 2.9 million per annum. When one takes into account the additional fee income possible for treating private insured people who presently bypass the capacity constrained service at UHW, the reduced cost of bed days for those presently waiting in hospital to access the Waterford Cath Lab and the defrayed costs of displaced ambulance and medical personnel charged with escorting patient transfers, that figure drops significantly.
Yet the Department of Health and the Minister are intent on further reviews including a national review of PPCI (emergency heart attack intervention) before any decision or action can be taken to expand the southeast regional service.
Simple logic has been deliberately ignored
Medical based argument, unbiased scientific/ economic analysis and simple logic have deliberately been ignored in this case assessment to date. Health Equality For the South East (HEFSE) believes the only other plausible reason for undermining the case for the southeast region’s service need and/ or possibly subverting the review outcome is money, that is another’s financial self interest.
Regional and national politicians who persist in ignoring the simple facts bolstering the case for a 24/7 South East Cardiac Care service are complicit in allowing this subversion continue in HEFSE’s opinion. Over coming weeks and months, with the activity drive to commence the recently announced reviews, the identities and motivations of those driving the agenda will hopefully become clearer. The identities of those who stand to gain most and benefit from another potentially negative review outcome for a southeast regional 24/7 Cardiac Service certainly will.
Health Minister Simon Harris having declared himself “referee” in this new review game needs to show clear leadership and control of his department seniors by demonstrating that he not alone understand the rules by which this game is to be played, but that he also is prepared to “cry foul” in the event of an inaccurate score.
Many lives and political careers depend on it.
Matt Shanahan is PRO for Health Equality For the South East.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Can we please stop propagating the lies of the English media? Brexit did the damage, not the protocol.
@James Pelow: Very well said. They’re actually using it as a distraction. And it’s drawing us into something that has nothing to do with us. Brexit is the problem. End of story.
You can’t hold a poll asking people if they think the Protocol is good for Northern Ireland without clarifying what the alternative is.
That’s like asking a child if they think the settlement that their parents agreed to after divorce is good.
Let’s be clear… article 16 does not end the protocol. It can suspend a part of it for a short period of time. When the UK says it will trigger A16, call it out for what they want to do….they want to scrap it and force a border on the island of Ireland or a border between Ireland and EU. That’s their plan and I believe it’s been the plan all along. This mess has been made by the UK and the protocol is a plaster. The GB companies that send those goods that will never end up back in the EU (including ROI) need to be better catered for. The issue is that there is no trust between the UK and EU as, so far, the UK hasn’t implemented main parts of the protocol so all at risk goods must be considered guilty until proven innocent.
Ok theJournal…. Time to correct your headlines… “Is Brexit bad or good for firms in Northern Ireland?”
The protocol is a workaround to the main issue, Brexit..
While I’ve no doubt it has caused some legitimate disruption for businesses heavily linked to GB, how did the study take into account costs (for consultancy etc) that would’ve been incurred without the procotol because they also trade with the EU?
Or how did it take into account all the paperwork NI businesses save because they can trade with the Republic and the rest of the EU freely?
All these analyses seem to assume that trade with Ireland was either insignificant, or its continuity was a a given (neither of these are true) and that any disruption with GB is a cost without any quantifiable benefit (again not true).
It’s not the protocol that’s not working. It’s brexit that’s not working.
How dare the EU break away from the United Kingdom. They’ve made things very difficult for everyone, especially the Brits!
By leaving the CU and SM and going for a Sharia Brexit GB turned itself into a legal and regulatory Kaliningrad. Their call-their choice…If they hadn’t CHOSEN that there would be no protocol. They want a hard border in IRL or IRL out the the EU-they will get neither but what they will get is humiliation.
It is improving trade between north and south.
have your say