Agenda item

The Vice-Chair introduced those in attendance for this item and asked the Director of Corporate Programmes, Delivery and Operations, North Durham CCG, Mike Brierley to give an update report in relation to Shotley Bridge Hospital (for copy see file of minutes).

The Director of Corporate Programmes, Delivery and Operations reminded Members of the background of the North Durham CCG working with NHS Property Services to look at what future service delivery options may look like, the right services in the right places. 

It was highlighted that the driver for change was the current state of the building and there was an opportunity to align strategy to provide more care closer to home, through review of the actual health needs and future needs in the area.

Members were given information in relation to the economic and financial case for change, together with a clinical case for change, the latter including the changes in GP services, and the relationships between health and social care services, working closer together in delivering care, for example TAPs.

The Director of Corporate Programmes, Delivery and Operations noted a stakeholder event in October 2017 and Reference Group Meetings, with the group including local Members and MPs, with the Portfolio Holder, Councillor L Hovvels chairing the group.  It was added that the Healthcare Planner had set out the requirements for a new build based upon current activity with a 10% allowance for population growth.  Members noted the options as set out within the report and were informed of the issues in relation to beds, theatre, chemotherapy, urgent care and out-patients.

Councillor J Robinson entered the meeting at 11.10am

Councillor J Robinson in the Chair

The Director of Corporate Programmes, Delivery and Operations referred Members to the next steps as set out in the report, which included: an outline business case to NHS England by the end of 2018; public consultation in early 2019; a full business case Spring/Summer 2019; with construction later in 2019.

The Chairman thanked the Director of Corporate Programmes, Delivery and Operations and asked Members for their questions and comments.

Councillor O Temple noted he had not slept well since reading the report and noted two truths.  Firstly that a six-storey high building was not right for modern healthcare, with local Members understanding this, however, there was an expectation that something comparable in terms of services would replace this.  He noted secondly that all the statistics that had been fed into the Healthcare Planner had been from current activity at Shotley Bridge Hospital, which he felt had been run-down deliberately over a period of time.  Councillor O Temple explained he felt that it should be need that was tested, not the number of people that passed through the door.  He added that while paragraph 71 of the report stated “It is important to clarify that no decisions have been made about the future delivery of services within Shotley Bridge…”, paragraph 38 referred to a 24 bed ward, paragraph 41 referred to CDDFT and UHND stating they did not supportive of delivering surgical services at locations other than their main sites.  Councillor O Temple added that paragraph 45 noted plans to refurbish and increase capacity at the Durham chemotherapy unit and in relation to urgent care, the report stated that urgent care was only recommended during the hours 8.00 am to 12.00 midnight.  He noted that these all seemed to be decisions that have been made.  Councillor O Temple asked that the Committee not accept the report, rather note the report and request that a postcode analysis based on need be undertaken and this fed into the Healthcare Planner.

The Director of Corporate Programmes, Delivery and Operations noted that in terms of any run-down of services, this was not the case and patients were not referred away from Shotley Bridge.  He added that where an appointment may become available sooner at another location, this would be offered to a patient for them to make a choice.  He continued by reiterating that there had not been any decisions made, and that in terms of bed provision there would be a need to provide cost-effective solution, with the recommendation being for 24 beds.  The Director of Corporate Programmes, Delivery and Operations noted the refurbishment in terms of the UHND Chemotherapy Unit, however, decisions had not yet been made and work would be undertaken to understand this issue.  In relation to urgent care, he added that there were many other strategies and that the options were for discussion, with the recommendation being based upon activity.  The Director of Corporate Programmes, Delivery and Operations noted the first draft postcode analysis and added that further analysis work, utilising Public Health systems, may be undertaken, with some work having been done provisionally.

The Chairman asked as regards what would be in the business case.  The Director of Corporate Programmes, Delivery and Operations noted it would include: the strategic case; the financial case; options; the consultation process; and engagement prior to moving to a preferred options stage.

Councillor R Crute asked what information had been presented via the Reference Group and what had been presented to Committee.  Councillor R Bell noted he seconded the request by Councillor O Temple in relation to analysis by postcode of demand not simply activity.  He added that by activity would be acceptable if there was not a sense that some were steered towards other services.

Councillor L Hovvels noted she chaired the Reference Group and noted that the model being developed was good.  She added that Members’ voices were being heard and that meaningful information was being provided to keep up-to-date on progress and affording an opportunity to shape that progress.  Councillor O Temple noted he was grateful for the Reference Group.

Councillor J Chaplow noted the report referred to potential in relation to hospice provision.  The Director of Corporate Programmes, Delivery and Operations noted this was one option and discussions were taking place.

Councillor A Hopgood noted paragraph 23 noted sharing of resources and facilities and added that if there was potential impact on UHND then local Members for the Durham area should also be engaged with, for example impacts in terms of infrastructure, car parking and so on.

Councillor A Patterson noted the report recommendation asked to accept the report for information, however, to have a report in terms of the next steps and options back at Committee prior to consultation, inviting the Reference Group Members to attend.  Councillor O Temple agreed, with the inclusion of a report by demand and locality.  The Director of Corporate Programmes, Delivery and Operations noted that this type of information was being worked on and could be reported back.

Resolved:

(i)        That the report for information be noted.

(ii)        That a further report be presented to a future meeting of the Adults, Wellbeing and Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee, including analysis of need by locality/postcode, with members of the Reference Group being invited to attend that meeting.