King's College Hospital - 3rd worst in country?! Please read/sign!

[KesterBrewin]

Data just out suggesting that, in terms of waiting times on trolleys before treatment, King's is the 3rd worst in the country!

Both of my children were born there and I think the staff are doing an amazing job under very difficult circumstances - NHS cuts, a tricky location with loads going on and even people demanding to be taken there so they might get on '24 hrs in A&E'!

Anyway, some local councillors have started a petition to try to get Jeremy Hunt to fund the place properly, and I think people should sign it. Why? Because we need to save the NHS and this is a local issue we can get behind that has national resonance.

It's hosted here: http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/jeremy-hunt-secretary-of-state-for-health-act-now-on-shocking-trolley-waiting-times-at-king-s-college-hospital

Thank you! Let's do great stuff for King's!

[Too Good To Be True]

King's College Hospital is one of the worst-hit hospitals for people turning up to A&E who shouldn't be there.

Surely George Osborne is the guy to go after? All ministers try to get as much money as possible for their department. Even Conservatives!

And then you have to decide where does the money come from? Other hospitals in London? The flood victims? Syrian orphans? Higher taxes?

Agree the staff do a great job, but I can't sign petitions like this.

[peckhamasbestos]

Got to say in my experience (which is vicarious) I wouldn't want to be taken anywhere else (if I had to go to A&E at all)

[Louisa]

Never had an issue at kings. Also bare in mind, it is the one of the busiest A&E departments in The world, not just the UK. It also supports a high density urban population, so statistically it will have higher waiting times surely due to sheer numbers?

Louisa.

[muffins78]

Always had fantastic care in Kings and if the waiting times are up and/or people are going there because they shouldn't (e.g. not been able to get an appt at their GP), then the statistics is not representative!

Like Louisa said too, they do support a high density population also, so really they do a great job, and can only prioritize as best they can with the resources they have. I hope they get the support they need!

[uncleglen]

The demands on the NHS are such that the tax payers' pockets would have to be a bottomless pit if all needs were met. I have experienced and witnessed some very annoying things there over the years- including being pestered at length by channel 4 staff when a relative was very seriously injured.

[unlurked]

Until you've been to Guys, yot don't know what proper treatment and care is. Kings is poor.

[uncleglen]

UCHL is pretty good too.

[Sue]

unlurked Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Until you've been to Guys, yot don't know what

> proper treatment and care is. Kings is poor

xxxxx

What a ridiculous generalisation!

Are you saying that every department, ward and person in Guys is better than the equivalent at King's?

I had absolutely fantastic treatment and care at King's A&E, in fact I meant to write and thank them at the time, but to my shame I didn't.

[spark67]

I can only go from personal experience of when diagnosed with stage 4 lymphoma 5 yrs ago, was started on chemo imediatly ....and here I am clear 5 yrs on, and still getting great aftercare, its so big there though that I'm sure there are cases where people experiences are not so great, as with most hospitals due to overwhelming demand. I found the staff at kings do a great job under the circumstances.

[unlurked]

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> unlurked Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Until you've been to Guys, yot don't know what

> > proper treatment and care is. Kings is poor

>

> xxxxx

>

> What a ridiculous generalisation!

>

> Are you saying that every department, ward and

> person in Guys is better than the equivalent at

> King's?

>

> I had absolutely fantastic treatment and care at

> King's A&E, in fact I meant to write and thank

> them at the time, but to my shame I didn't.

So predictable! Did you read the post, Sue? Have you been to Guys, Sue? Are you saying that every department, ward and person in Kings is better than the equivalent at

Guys? Just for you Sue, in my experience of attending Kings for years, Guys is far better in treatment, time waiting, politeness, cleanliness and care.

One major thing wrong with Kings, not their fault, is the place being filled with cops and scummy criminals who have been 'injured' committing crimes etc.

[Sue]

unlurked Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So predictable! Did you read the post, Sue? Have

> you been to Guys, Sue?

xxxxxxx

Yes, obviously I read the post, because I answered it.

Yes I've had treatment at Guys.

Did you read my post, unlurked? Because you haven't actually answered my question.

And my post was "predictable" because ..... ?

[Growlybear]

Unfortunately I've had a lot of experiences with local hospitals over the last couple of years. I've found that the Breast Unit and Oncology staff at Kings have been amazing, although the treatment I had at St Thomas was in a completely different league altogether and couldn't possibly have been better if I had been a private patient paying thousands for my treatment.

I've also had several experiences of the A&E departments at Kings and St Thomas, and less recently at Lewisham. On the two occasions I went to St Thomas A&E I was seen almost immediately, and treated with complete dignity, respect, and professionalism. The treatment at Lewisham was great as well. But I've been to Kings on two occasions in the past two years for myself, and once with my husband when he was admitted by ambulance, and the treatment on all three occasions was abysmal. I recognise that the A&E staff are under incredible pressure, but the way my husband was treated, having been taken in with a potentially life threatening complaint, couldn't really have been much worse. Apart from a catalogue of incompetence from the medical staff, the nursing staff were incredibly rude and uncaring towards both of us. After standing by my husband's bed for two hours I politely asked a male nurse if there was a chair anywhere that I could sit on as I was not feeling well because of my cancer treatment - he returned a few minutes later and actually threw the chair into the cubicle at me. I've spoken to several people who have had similarly awful A&E experiences, although to be fair, other people who have had complications with their cancer treatment have had a much more positive experience.

[Mick Mac]

unlurked Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Until you've been to Guys, yot don't know what

> proper treatment and care is. Kings is poor.

Maybe but I owe my wife's life to Kings so I'm not going to criticize either Kings or it's staff.

I think you are out of order to be honest.

[unlurked]

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> unlurked Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Until you've been to Guys, yot don't know what

> > proper treatment and care is. Kings is poor.

>

> Maybe but I owe my wife's life to Kings so I'm not

> going to criticize either Kings or it's staff.

>

> I think you are out of order to be honest.

Er why, because I give an honest opinion that you don't agree with? No one else on this thread not out of order that have a differnt opinion based on experience? Just me. Be objective not emotive. I've had experiencd births and deaths at Kings and stand by what ive said.

[KalamityKel]

Not particularly surprised at the stats although it's incredibly disappointing given the investment and centralisation of specialist departments.

Over the last year or so my family has had appalling and also fantastic experiences with both Kings and Lewisham hospitals from A&E to specialist wards. I cannot understand why it has to be this way. Surely in today's world (perhaps an ideal world) a consistent positive approach can be demonstrated.

[Peckhampam]

Hallo

I am a public governor for King's, representing the Southwark South constituency. I am obviously taking note of this thread and threads like it. But if you wish to contact me personally about anything to do with your experience-good or bad- of the hospital please do via a pm (and then I can give you my phone details.) Governors are there to represent the members of the Foundation Trust but also, under new legislation, the public from their constituency, so please do get in touch so I can take your issues forward.

[showboat]

Of course I can only speak from personal experience, but Kings have seen my mum through two bouts of cancer and also performed an emergency operation which required the use of three top surgeons to save my wife's life after the birth of our first child. On each occasion everyone found the quality of care throughout to be excellent.

I myself had to spend two nights in Guys last year and they were indeed bloody good. I got talking to one of the nurses and he said he loved the NHS because it did "far more good than harm", pointing out that a) no organisation is perfect and b) he'd spent time in the private sector and would not have his dog treated in a Harley Sreet clinic, let alone a human. The stories he told were pretty horrendous.

Is Guys better than Kings? Maybe. But then Kings has a massive, over stretched A+E dept situated in the middle of a high crime area. And a lot of people go there when they shouldn't, stretching its resources further.

Something to also remember is they have different specialities. If you need Ear, Nose and Throat, for example, Kings will transfer you to Guys, whereas the Gynaceology treatment at Kings is world-renowned.

If we have wide experiences of this hospital or that, then of course we should let people know. But these things have to be seen in context - the govt. is doing it's best to dismantle the NHS by stealth, all hospitals are fighting for resources, and in the final analysis we still have access to first world medicine that doesn't cost us any more money than we've already paid out in tax. A lot of people ain't got that!

[steveo]

The problem with King's A&E is pissed, ignorant, belligerent, violent, crackhead, serial hypochondriac, wasters with self inflicted complaints

Delete where applicable

[wavyline girl]

I have recent experience of Kings casualty?it was always bad in terms of waiting time and facilities in the past.

The department seems to be straining, probably because of the volumes. That's down to a variety of reasons, which I shan't postulate here.

Where I have seen improvement is on the wards?ok it might just be the wards I have dealt with (Cardiac & Vascular) but there seems to have been an improvement in the attitude of Doctors and Nursing Staff, and more importantly the standard of care.

In the past I have encountered aloof and arrogant doctors, and "attitude" from the nursing staff, and auxiliaries. This time round I have only encountered professional, caring, and communicative people, which is such a relief!

[El Pibe]

Until you've been to Tommy's, yot(sic) don't know what proper treatment and care is. Guys(sic) is poor

[dulwichbloke]

My hospital is better than your hospital!

[siouzie14]

I am a Southwark resident and user of King's College Hospital (KCH). I am not a health professional.

I think it's dangerous to generalise from one set of statistics. KCH is a major trauma hospital serving a wide area of South East London and Kent, and has now taken a number of other hospitals under its wing. KCH is heavily utilised.

Taking two of the hospitals from the list on the petition:

COMPARE THIS WEEK'S STATS from the BBC web site http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25055444

King's College Hospital: 3828 people attended A&E. 150 people had a trolley wait of 4-12 hours. 3.92% of attendees

Portsmouth Hospitals: 1900 people attended A&E. 86 people had a trolley wait of 4-12 hours 4.53% of attendees

So in percentage terms the 6th worst performer has a poorer performance than the 3rd worst performer, King's.

Personally I have had a very good service from KCH in several specialisms over the last 20 years or so, and there have been undoubted improvements in patient management and care, with greater use of technology over that time. My family has used A&E on occasions, expected to wait and couldn't really complain.

Before criticising KCH, you have to look at the wider health picture in the area it serves: the changes in the GP service particularly the out of hours service, the changing demographic & aging population, the level of chronic illness in the area, uncertainty about where to get emergency help and the demise of NHS Direct.

There is now a campaign in London (http://www.notalwaysaande.co.uk/) to get people to use other sources of help incl pharmacies which are under-utilised in the UK compared to other countries.

In particular there is confusion about how to get help out of hours when the GP practices are closed. Someone is taken ill at home on a Saturday evening - where do you turn to? You might call SELDOC but not get a fast service, or a home visit, and you are told to go to A&E.

Plans are afoot (well in 2-3 years time) to modify the local primary care services and provide better all round GP care which will help to stem the flow of people using A&E.

I won't be signing the petition but action is needed on the wider health provision in the area to ensure that KCH A&E is used for genuine emergencies.

[ultraburner]

Amazing service from Kings for our family.

(and unlurked in 'continuing to talk shit' shocker.....)

[unlurked]

Edit