NHS England sees 35% increase in patients waiting more than 18 weeks while NHS Scotland reports a fall of 0.2% despite a 14.6% increase in demand

NHS70

There are always problems in some direct comparisons between the UK health services  (see below) but percentage changes and independent reports in the BMJ are reasonably comparable and illuminating.

According to a May 2018 report, in the BMJ:

‘The number of people waiting more than 18 weeks for NHS [England] treatment has increased by 35% in the past year, official figures show.’

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k2114

In a comparable period, NHS Scotland reported:

‘In March 2018, for all Boards, 81.2% of patients were reported as being seen within 18 weeks. The figures for January and February were 81.0% and 81.0%respectively.’

https://www.isdscotland.org/Health-Topics/Waiting-Times/Publications/2018-05-29/2018-05-29-WT-18WksRTT-Report.pdf?78953188658

NHS Scotland also reported:

‘88,544 patients in NHS Scotland were waiting for one of the eight key diagnostic tests and investigations. This is an increase of 14.6% compared with the number of patients waiting at  31 December 2017 and an increase of 14.6% since 31 March 2017.’

https://www.isdscotland.org/Health-Topics/Waiting-Times/Publications/2018-05-29/2018-05-29-WT-Diagnostic-Report.pdf?10685366393

Once Ruth Davidson strong-arms Theresa May into giving more money for health care and into letting more migrants stay and work in it, NHS Scotland can only get better.

Footnote: On NHS England statistics unreliability:

NHS Waiting Times: ‘Unreliable’ Stats Hide Delays – Sky News

 

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “NHS England sees 35% increase in patients waiting more than 18 weeks while NHS Scotland reports a fall of 0.2% despite a 14.6% increase in demand

  1. Alasdair Macdonald May 30, 2018 / 12:17 pm

    And, just yesterday, the BBC Scotland website gave us this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-44290082

    Selective use of data as usual. The article has quotes from Anas Sarwar and an unnamed LibDem, but nothing from THE COLONEL or her party.

    It is a BLAMING article, i.e. its intention is to BLAME and not use data to seek for reasons and to explore ways of improving the service.

    Liked by 2 people

    • gavin May 30, 2018 / 6:40 pm

      Its what they do, Alasdair. What they have always done, only now we are more aware.
      I am a law abiding person, but how I wish that someone could hack into the BBC. Its more secretive and manipulative than the Kremlin.

      Like

  2. Contrary May 30, 2018 / 6:56 pm

    Huh. Nearly missed that last paragraph there John: are you suggesting that Ruth will DO something? Are you actually suggesting that Ruth has any influence at all? And is going to DO something,,, positive??! That seems to be far too close to the gutter press fantasy land inventing ridiculous wild possibilities of something that they think might happen in the future if something improbable happens first, to be comfortable!

    Or are you TESTING us for paying attention 😀

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s