|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
26 Apr 2007 : Column 1282Wcontinued
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many (a) gun-shot and (b) knife wound injuries were treated in hospitals in each of the last five years. 
Andy Burnham: Information is not collected on the number of gun shot and knife wound injuries treated in hospitals.
Information is available, however, on patients who were actually admitted to hospital for gun shot and knife injuries (these figures do not include
patients who were treated in accident and emergency departments for gun shot/knife injuries and not
admitted). Those cause codes that appear relevant to the question are presented in the table as follows.
|Count of finished admission episodes for gun shot and knife wound injuries 2001-02 to 2005-06, national health service hospitals, England|
Intent self-harm by rifle shotgun and larger firearm discharge
Rifle shotgun and larger firearm discharge undetermined intent
Finished admission episodes
A finished admission episode is the first period of in-patient care under one consultant within one healthcare provider. Please note that admissions do not represent the number of in-patients, as a person may have more than one admission within the year.
The cause code is a supplementary code that indicates the nature of any external cause of injury, poisoning or other adverse effects.
Figures have not been adjusted for shortfalls in data (i.e. the data are ungrossed).
Source: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), The Information Centre for health and social care.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what estimate she has made of the number of people suffering from (a) personality disorder and (b) dangerous and severe personality disorder; 
(2) how many people are (a) detained and (b) receiving treatment for (i) personality disorder and (ii) dangerous severe personality disorder. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: [holding answer 20 April 2007]: Personality disorders are common conditions, with a considerable variation in the severity and degree of distress and dysfunction caused. An independent study, The Epidemiology of Personality Disorders by Dr. Paul Moran, in 2002 reported a prevalence rate of personality disorder amongst adults in the community of 10 to 13 per cent. However, this estimate is for all personality disorders, and a separate prevalence rate for dangerous and severe personality disorder (DSPD) was not made in the Moran study.
Approximately 250 to 300 people are being treated and supported by established specialist national health service personality disorder services, without any form of detention, and an additional 1300 people in new medium secure, community forensic and non-forensic pilot services. Of the latter, about 50 people at any one time will be undergoing in-patient assessment or treatment under sections of the Mental Health Act. There are 40 secure places within forensic mental health services for people with personality disorder who need treatment under detention. A further 400 male patients are detained on court orders under the legal category of psychopathic disorder in secure psychiatric hospitals.
DSPD is not a clinical diagnosis but a description of a patient profile for those whose personality disorder is of an acuteness or severity and risk to indicate they are likely to be the most serious threat to others. There are an estimated 2,000 to 2,500 individuals in the prison population who meet DSPD criteria. Although there are no existing research data on the number of people with DSPD in the community, further work has been commissioned to provide prospective data about the size of this group, which are expected to be available later this year.
DSPD pilot services are provided within Rampton and Broadmoor high secure hospitals and Her Majestys Prisons at Whitemoor, Frankland and Low Newton. The current figures for those receiving assessment and treatment within these services is 66 in the national health service and 143 in the prison estate. All are detained, with a majority serving current prison sentences.
Mr. Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what techniques and procedures are being used to combat MRSA in NHS hospitals; what use is being made of hydrogen peroxide; how widely it is being used for this purpose; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis
[holding answer 23 April 2007]: As part of the Saving Lives programme, which is designed to support national health service trusts in reducing healthcare associated infections like methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), high impact interventions have been developed. The high impact interventions are simple evidence based tools. They reinforce the practical actions that clinical staff need to undertake every time for key procedures in order to significantly reduce healthcare-associated infections including MRSA. They cover preventing the risk of
microbial contamination (which includes hand hygiene, personal protective equipment, aseptic technique and safe disposal of sharps), central venous catheter care, peripheral line care, renal dialysis catheter care, preventing surgical site infection, care of ventilated patients and urinary catheter care.
The Department also published enhanced advice on screening, including decolonisation, in November 2006.
The Rapid Review Panel (RRP) has reviewed two hydrogen peroxide vapour products and recommended that both products have potential value and that in use trials are now needed. Trials have been undertaken within the national health service and these products have been utilised in outbreak situations.
It is not known how widely hydrogen peroxide vapour is used in the NHS. The NHS does not collect data regarding the usage of products by individual trusts or collectively for the NHS. NHS trusts are free to choose which products to purchase and will maintain their own records.
The Department is liaising with all the bodies which play a role in the assessment of innovative products about how the Department might best assist the take-up of products that have a favourable RRP recommendation. Discussions are at an early stage. Ultimately, they will include how innovative products are assessed for cost-effectiveness and their impact on services, thus creating a more streamlined process.
Mrs. Dorries: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much has been awarded by her Department under Our health, our care, our community since July 2006, broken down by (a) strategic health authority and (b) primary care trust; how many bids have been submitted; what the final period is for the submission of bids; and if she will make a statement. 
Andy Burnham: Ten proposals were received in wave 1. An announcement about four of these was made on the 21 December. Two of the schemes were withdrawn, one did not meet the criteria and we are resolving an outstanding query on one of the schemes. Two of the schemes were carried forward and announced with the second wave.
The funding allocated to these four schemes totals £44.5 million, and the following chart breaks this down into strategic health authority (SHAs) and primary care trust (PCT) area, and the amount allocated to each scheme.
|SHA||PCT||Amount awarded (£ million)|
Decisions are still outstanding on the following schemes.
|SHA||PCT||Amount requested (£ million)|
North Yorkshire and York (New Community campusSelby War Memorial Hospital)
Gloucestershire (New community servicesBourton and Moreton)
Gloucestershire (New facilities for community servicesBerkley Vale)
Bath and North East Somerset (Community care centreKeynsham)
Twenty-five schemes were submitted in wave 2. We approved and announced details of 10 schemes, including two that were carried forward from wave 1, on 11 April.
The schemes announced on 11 April are listed in the following table.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|