|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Graham Stuart: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many MRSA cases there have been in each hospital in Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust area in each of the last five years; and if she will make a statement. 
The information is not available in the format required. However, methicillin resistant
Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) figures for Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals National Health Services Trust are as follows:
The Department continues to engage those trusts facing the most significant challenges to their delivery plan, which ensures the trust meets an agreed level of reduction in MRSA bacteraemia. Here it is working with trusts most likely to benefit from tailored support. Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust is engaged in this improvement programme, and a departmental team concluded a diagnostic assessment, and recommendations for action were due to be presented to the trust board on 25 July. The board will, with departmental support, be working up a detailed action plan to deliver the agreed reduction in MRSA cases.
The Office for National Statistics published figures on the number of deaths where methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus was mentioned on the death certificate from 1999 to 2004 in Health Statistics Quarterly 29 in spring 2006. The full paper is at:
Mr. Graham Stuart: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many cases of MRSA have been identified in hospitals in Yorkshire and the Humber in each of the last five years, broken down by national health service trust; and if she will make a statement. 
|April 2001 to March 2002||April 2002 to March 2003||April 2003 to March 2004||April 2004 to March 2005||April 2005 to March 2006|
Department of Health Mandatory methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Bacteraemia Surveillance Scheme
This is the first Government to introduce mandatory MRSA surveillance and this continues to be developed. An improvement programme has been introduced to provide tailored support to those trusts with the most challenging MRSA bacteraemia numbers. The objective is to assist in diagnosing those issues which prevent reduction in infections and to develop practical, robust action plans that speed-up progress and delivery. General support and shared learning is enhanced via trusts Performance Improvement Network, which has over 80 participants.
Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps her Department is taking to ensure the protection of the rights of data subjects under the Data Protection Act 1998, in relation to the National Care Records System; to which categories of electronic information patients (a) will and (b) will not be able to restrict access; and what steps are being taken to ensure security and confidentiality of subject-identifiable data. 
Caroline Flint: The Department has placed the protection of individual rights at the heart of the new national health service care records service. The Department is working closely with the Information Commissioner to ensure that the requirements of the Data Protection Act 1998 are met in full, and is sympathetic to the Commissioners call for increased penalties for those who misuse personal health and other information under Section 55 of the Act.
However, the Data Protection Act does not provide individuals with the right to restrict access to information where the information is processed in accordance with the principles set out in the Act. The rights of individuals to restrict access to information that relates to them stem from common law confidentiality obligations rather than the Data Protection Act.
Where information is held in confidence, the common law allows individuals to prevent information from being shared without their consent unless, exceptionally, there is a reason for sharing that requires obligations of confidentiality to be overridden. The new system of electronic care records is therefore being designed to enable patients to restrict access to information that the NHS holds in confidence. Many older NHS systems were not designed to safeguard confidentiality in this way and these will be phased out over the next few years.
A persons right to confidentiality can, however, be overridden by statute or by a court order and, where these apply, restrictions placed on access by patients have to be set aside. Patients are not permitted to place restrictions on access to information where it is clear that to do so would put others at risk of serious harm. Also, exceptionally, patient restrictions may have to be overridden by a health professional where the public interest in sharing information outweighs obligations of confidentiality, for example in child protection cases. Where an individuals restrictions are overridden the system will generate an alert to enable senior staff to check that the decision was appropriate and lawful.
The Department has produced what we believe is the most comprehensive privacy statement of any public service in the form of the NHS care record guarantee for England, setting out 12 commitments the NHS makes to patients in order to protect their confidentiality. A major campaign is planned to inform the public about what information the NHS keeps about them, how it is used, the safeguards in place, and their options for putting restrictions on who can access information about them.
In addition to ensuring compliance with the law, we are committed to best practice in maintaining the security and confidentiality of information systems by applying role-based access, smartcard technology and individual regulation to manage the use of NHS care records. More generally, the Department promotes the highest standards of information governance across the whole health and social care sector in the interests of all patients and clinicians.
Mr. Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence makes an estimate of the total financial impact that its technology appraisal guidance will have on the NHS in a year. 
Andy Burnham: Each technology appraisal published by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence sets out the potential overall cost impact on the national health service of the recommendations.
Mr. Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether a limit is placed on the financial impact that technology appraisal guidance from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence may have on the NHS in relation to cancer treatments. 
Andy Burnham: There is no such limit. The role of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence is to provide the national health service with guidance on the use of health technologies based on an assessment of their clinical and cost effectiveness.
Mr. Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether provision has been made for the funding of licensed cancer treatments being assessed by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence for which guidance is expected during 2006-07. 
Funds for the anticipated costs of guidance from the National Institute for Health and
Clinical Excellence are included in the Department's allocation of resources to the national health service.
Jessica Morden: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) whether final guidance from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence has been (a) reversed and (b) amended as a result of an appeal; 
(2) whether the final guidance issued in a technology appraisal by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence has ever significantly differed from the recommendations published in the original consultation document. 
Andy Burnham: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence's final guidance has on a number of occasions been amended as the result of either the appeal process or consultation responses.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made of the impact of the 2003 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidance on the use of drug-eluting coronary stent technology on (a) outcomes for patients and (b) repeat revascularisation procedures. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: The Department has not made an assessment of the impact of the 2003 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidance on the use of drug-eluting coronary stent technology on outcomes for patients and repeat revascularisation procedures. Furthermore, data on outcomes for patients and how many have required repeat revascularisation procedures are not collected centrally.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what discussions she has had with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence on the status of the review of guidance on the use of drug-eluting coronary stent technology; and if she will make a statement. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: The Department has had no discussions with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) on the status of their review of guidance on the use of drug-eluting coronary stent technology. I understand that NICE is currently reviewing this guidance and expects to issue revised guidance to the national health service in October 2006.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|