Agenda item

Dr Peter Maskell, WKHCP Medical Director (Integrated Care), Maidstone and Tunbridge Well NHS Trust, Dr Kate Langford, Chief Medical Officer were in attendance for this item.

1.    The Chair read a question received from a member of the public about the availability of mechanical thrombectomy in the county. He also raised his concern about the delay in establishing a HASU at William Harvey Hospital.

2.    Dr Langford introduced the report and confirmed that a thrombectomy unit would be located at the Kent and Canterbury Hospital after being commissioned by the ICB. It was a separate project to the HASU. Dr Langford and Dr Maskell provided further information on the importance of co-location of mechanical thrombectomy with interventional radiology. It was noted that no A&E was required on site but good transport links.

3.    Dr Maskell provided further information on the current pathway for mechanical thrombectomy in Kent, which saw patients accessing care at the Royal London Hospital. It was recognised that the wait time at home was a concern and that there was an ongoing public health campaign.

4.    A Member requested more information on the call-to-needle time, as any delays could have a significant impact.

5.    The Committee echoed the Chair’s concern about the delay of the HASU at William Harvey Hospital, which they felt disadvantaged East Kent residents. Dr Langford said there was a commitment to delivering a HASU at that location but at the last Gateway Review, there was not adequate assurance that East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust (EKHUFT) had plans in place to take the project forward. The ICB were working with the Trust to produce the required plans. It was noted that the stroke service at Kent and Canterbury Hospitals was performing well, but that was not a suitable long term location for a HASU because there was no A&E on site.

6.    A Member expressed concern about the scanning process at the Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother (QEQM) Hospital and questioned why there were not two scanners on site. Dr Maskell said that most acute hospitals had two scanners and he would confirm this outside of the meeting.[1] 

7.    Mr Goatham (Healthwatch) queried the recruitment for the WHH HASU, asking whether it would be affected as the other 2 HASUs in the county would be ready sooner. Dr Maskell said that staffing had been identified as a driving factor to poor performance. It had been agreed by the three acute Trusts that they would recruit together but the delay to the William Harvey needed to be considered and reviewed.

8.    A Member asked for assurance that the issues identified at the Gateway Review were being addressed and asked the timeframe around this. Dr Langford responded that greater cost detail was required in the plans and the Trust were working at pace to finalise that. It was anticipated that it would take one to two months to complete.

9.    RESOLVED that the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee:

a.    have not been assured by EKHUFT and the Integrated Care Board that works would proceed on the scheme at William Harvey Hospital.

b.    note the commitment that the HASU will open at William Harvey but with significant delay.

c.    request a briefing as soon as possible on the plans and timetable for opening the HASU at WHH.