tanyatriangles

iTrader: (2)

Saw my back specialist yesterday after a wait of THREE MONTHS

It turned out to be a cursory ten minute interview/examination with the specialist's registrar, that just verified the diagnosis I gave my doctor and my doctor agreed with.

Now I have to wait ANOTHER 6 weeks to have an MRI scan done before they can decide whether they can offer me any help...........

SunnySideUp

Bad backs sometimes improve a lot after about 4 months naturally.

I was in hospital emergency with my back and I begged for an operation - they took so long over arranging it that it improved on its own so much that I am glad I didnt have the fuzing op.

The Zohan

I had an appointment to see the cardiologist in 9 weeks time.

1 week into this waiting time and three visits to the GP later i had toi be driven down to A&E where i was immediatley admitted and put in the HDU department ater a day or so the cardiologist explained that my lungs where filling with fluid, my heart was racing at 180/190 bpm and 120 average and i was a day or so away from a coma.

OK so partly down to the GP failing (IMHO) but 9 weeks for a heart related appointment!?!

What do you recon Pete, would my heart have got better a week after that appointment?

The treatment i received once in hospital was superb and still is as an out patient - i am lucky that i made it to hospital

SunnySideUp

We all have the option of going Private if we are really concerned ..... because, as we all know, under the Tories that will be the ONLY option available.

Of course, we all want an immediate response for free on the NHS ..... and I understand that, as I want that too ..... but, I do know that it has to be paid for - and there is no money anymore

The Zohan

So by avoiding the obvious question about 11+ years of NL rule and 11+ billion 'extra' put into the NHS we still have a slow service but lets not let fact's and the blatant misuse of our money ploughes into the NHS get in the way eh Pete

The Zohan

So by avoiding the obvious question about 11+ years of NL rule and 11+ billion 'extra' put into the NHS we still have a slow service but lets not let fact's and the blatant misuse of our money ploughed into the NHS get in the way eh Pete

Leslie

Thats bad news TT. Maybe the Trust is trying to get its foundation status and to do that has to fill up all the "target" tick boxes. That usually screws up the whole business of actual treatment!

Les

Snazy

They have clever ways of getting the desired figures these days, but we all knew that anyway.

My experience has been the opposite, but its all been for minor stuff. I was told to expect an 18 week wait for my wrist, and have been told its 3 weeks now. I would actually prefer it the other way, but thats another story.

From my understanding though, 3 months for a non life threatening op is pretty good.
I do hate waiting for these appointments to come round, only to be a repeat of themselves.
Fingers crossed once the MRI is done it will all speed up a bit.

Timwinner

iTrader: (3)

My doctors are sneeky. They will pencil you in about 10 days in advance and then confirm your appointment 2 days before, This way on paper no one ever waits more than 2 days.
Its rubbish if your ill.

GC8WRX

Blatant figures fiddling and shouldnt be allowed, but nu labia seem to approve of this sort of thing!

The Zohan

In the same way that catching a rapist or a murderer carries the same weight as catching a shoplifter so whilst the Police would rather catch a rapist or murderer to keep the all so important figures up the shoplifter is a much easier 'target'.

Good old NL - more well thought out planning and strategy to work for the voters!

Still, i am sure Jacqui Smiff as home secretary is keeping a keen eye on this, as she she does with her own staff and expense claims - were all in good hands

Leslie

Its perfect for them because they can quote the right kind of statistics to us even if the job is not actually being done-that is of no interest of course!

Les

Martin2005

_Meridian_

iTrader: (1)

This is old stuff: I had exactly the same trick pulled in 1987. Since the people here seem to have a political memory of about ten days I should point out that in 1987 the Blessed Margaret was still on the throne.


It's very simple: the voters want to see public services to be "value for money". The only way to do that is to see how they stack against targets, because everything else is too open to interpretation. You can't measure everything, because it would take too long. So you set targets in certain areas - usually either a) the most politically contentious, and/or b) the easiest to measure. But it doesn't matter where you set the targets because as soon as you set some, the local management will find a way to fiddle them. Admirers of good TV may remember a series called Cardiac Arrest, which went on and on about this - in about 1989.

I blame the voters for being stupid.


M