|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|Count of finished in year admission episodes where cataracts were the main operation|
1. Main operation
The main operation is the first recorded operation in the HES data set and is usually the most resource intensive procedure performed during the episode. It is appropriate to use main operation when looking at admission details, eg time waited, but the figures for all operations count of episodes give a more complete count of episodes with an operation.
2. OPCS codes:
C71 Extracapsular extraction of lens
C72 Intracapsular extraction of lens
C74 Other extraction of lens
C75 Prosthesis of lens
Primary care trust (PCT) and strategic health authority (SHA) data quality PCT and SHA data were added to historic data-years in the HES database using 2002-03 boundaries, as a one-off exercise in 2004. The quality of the data on PCT of Treatment and SHA of Treatment is poor in 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99, with over a third of all finished episodes having missing values in these years. Data quality of PCT of general practitioner (GP) practice and SHA of GP practice in 1997-98 and 1998-99 is also poor, with a high proportion missing values where practices changed or ceased to exist. There is less change in completeness of the residence-based fields over time, where the majority of unknown values are due to missing postcodes on birth episodes. Users of time series analysis including these years need to be aware of these issues in their interpretation of the data.
3. Finished in-year admissions
A finished in-year admission is the first period of in-patient care under one consultant within one healthcare provider, excluding admissions beginning before 1 April at the start of the datayear. Please note that admissions do not represent the number of in-patients, as a person may have more than one admission within the year.
Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), The Information Centre for health and social care.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made of the possible impact on the cheese industry of the proposed restrictions on television advertising of unhealthy foods. 
Caroline Flint: The Governments manifesto includes a commitment to help parents by restricting further the advertising and promotion to children of those foods and drinks that are high in fat, salt and sugar. There has been no assessment of the possible impact that proposed television restrictions on food and drink advertising to children will have on the cheese industry.
The Department believes that the nutrient profiling model, developed by the Food Standards Agency for use by Ofcom, provides a scientific and objective base for underpinning regulatory intervention in relation to television advertising to children. The restrictions that Ofcom has announced apply to programming aimed at or of particular appeal to children.
Mr. Blunt: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what was the cost of (a) establishing the choose and book system and (b) operating the system to date; whether the system is rolling out to plan; and if she will make a statement. 
Andy Burnham: At the end of November 2006, the cost to date of the development and operation of the choose and book computer system was £33.0 million under a contract with Atos Origin worth £64.5 million over five years.
In the week ending 3 December 2006, 32 per cent. of all national health service referrals to see a specialist went through choose and book and 77 per cent. of General Practitioners practices made at least one choose and book referral. All 170 eligible NHS acute trusts and a number of independent sector providers, are receiving choose and book referrals.
Andy Burnham: The proposed provision of elective surgery at Cirencester hospital is part of a wider scheme for the provision of services by an independent sector provider across the Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire area. United Kingdom Specialist Hospitals (UKSH) was appointed as the preferred bidder for the scheme in August 2006. Commercial negotiations with UKSH have continued since that time. Contract signature is anticipated in spring 2007 and services are expected to commence in summer 2008.
Proceedings for permission to bring a Judicial Review claim in relation to this contract have been served. The permission proceedings are being opposed. Until the outcome of these proceedings is known, it is not possible to know whether the timetable to sign this contract will need to be delayed.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether the Gloucester Partnership trust has any plans (a) to curtail and (b) to move any of the
NHS services which are provided at the Cirencester memorial hospital. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis: Gloucestershire Partnership national health service trust plans to continue providing community-based specialist mental health services in Cirencester, including out-patient services and assessment and treatment. However, the Memorial Centre is not fit for providing modern mental health services and the trust needs to ensure that it discharges its responsibilities in relation to health and safety at work and disabled persons access.
The trust is therefore seeking an alternative location in Cirencester. The trust will share any relocation proposals with patients and the public locally before a final decision is taken and has confirmed that there will be no gaps in service provision during relocation.
Until an alternative location is found, the Memorial Centre will continue to be used by staff to provide a range of services, including primary care assessment treatment, recovery and crisis teams, psychological therapy, substance misuse and eating disorder services.
Mr. Ivan Lewis: Decisions about local services are taken by local national health service organisations. NHS South West has advised officials that there are no accident and emergency services at Cirencester memorial day hospital. I understand that there is a minor injuries unit service at Cirencester hospital, and that there are no changes planned to that service.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much her Department has (a) budgeted for and (b) paid to the Community Service Volunteers in the 2006-07 financial year; and what the figures were in 2005-06. 
|Payments budgeted and paid to CSV|
Mr. Spellar: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she expects the chairman of the Appointments Commission to write to the right hon. Member for Warley with the information requested in the question on the West Midlands Ambulance Service answered on 7 November 2006, Official Report, column 1321W. 
Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will take steps to ensure that figures for missed dental appointments in each primary care trust in England are collected centrally. 
Clare Short: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what account was taken of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence's guidelines on the provision of dental services for children in deciding the minimum number of units of dental activity for children under the new contractual arrangements. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: The new contractual arrangements do not specify any minimum number of units of dental activity for children. Under the new contracts, dentists are required to provide the care and treatment that they judge clinically necessary and that the patient or, in the case of children, the parent or carer agrees to have provided. Dentists are also required to take into account the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence's guidelines in recommending the interval at which a patient should return for a further examination and assessment, having completed a course of treatment.
Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what growth funding was provided to each (a) primary care trust and (b) local health board from 1 April 2006 from the previous year's allocation for the delivery of NHS dentistry. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: Primary care trusts (PCTs) did not receive primary care dental allocations in 2005-06. The bulk of primary dental care continued to be provided through the centrally funded general dental services, with spending levels determined primarily by where dentists chose to practise and how much NHS work they chose to undertake. PCTs assumed full responsibility for local commissioning of primary care dentistry and received devolved budgets with effect from 1 April 2006. PCTs 2006-07 primary care dental allocations reflected levels of dental activity in each PCT area during the 12-month reference period October 2004 to September 2005, together with adjustments for contracts that opened during the reference period, funding plans agreed between PCTs and the Department for expanding personal dental services pilots or establishing new services, and upratings to 2006-07 prices.
The resources allocated to PCTs assumed overall gross expenditure (including income from dental patient charges) of around £2.4 billion, compared with gross expenditure of around £2.2 billion nationally in 2005-06.
Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of each primary care trust's devolved budget for NHS dentistry has not yet been allocated to the delivery of dental care. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: The in-year management of devolved primary dental care allocations is the responsibility of primary care trusts, overseen by strategic health authorities. Full year expenditure data will not be available until after the year end.
Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many children have accessed NHS dentistry in England in each of the last 12 months, broken down by primary care trust or local health board. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: The information is not available in the form requested. Under the new dental system, which came into effect from 1 April 2006, information is available on the number of patients who receive care or treatment from a national health service dentist in the most recent 24-month period. The Information Centre for Health and Social Care publishes this information, known as patients seen, each quarter. This is not yet available broken down into adult and child categories but is expected to be available in this format later this year.
The latest information available covering the 24-month periods ending March, June and September 2006 is set out by primary care trust in the table which has been placed in the Library. It is also available in the NHS Dental Statistics for England Quarter Two: 30 September 2006 publication at:
Dr. Naysmith: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the criteria will be for the funding decision for the National Diabetes Support Team in the next financial year; and when the decision will be made. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: Funding for diabetes is included in the proposed bundle for 2007-08. A service level agreement is being prepared for discussion and agreement between the Department and the 10 strategic health authorities (SHAs). This is planned to be finalised in the next few weeks. The 10 SHAs will then agree how individual budget funding is to be deployed in 2007-08 and the criteria to be used for decision-making.
Ms Rosie Winterton:
The value of the 2007-08 bundle has been finalised at £6.9 billion and the Department is currently preparing a service level
agreement for discussion and agreement between the Department and the 10 strategic health authorities (SHAs). This is expected to be finalised in the next few weeks. The SHAs will then agree how funding for individual programme budgets (such as for diabetes) will be deployed for 2007-08.
| Note: In 2006-2007 there was a change in the funding arrangements. Up until that point funding for the NDST was on the basis of a service level agreement (SLA) directly with Bradford primary care trust(PCT). From 2006-2007 onwards funding for the NDST has formed part of the bundle of national health service programme money passed to the new strategic health authorities (SHAs) to cover the cost of various centrally provided NHS activities such as national support teams.|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|