|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
21 May 2008 : Column 370Wcontinued
Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if he will establish a separate medicines appraisal system for ultra-orphan drugs; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) with reference to the answer of 14 May 2007, Official Report, columns 605-6W, on NHS: drugs, on what grounds the decision not to establish a separate appraisal system for ultra-orphan drugs was made; and whether this decision has been reviewed in 2008. 
Dawn Primarolo: A separate appraisal system for ultra orphan drugs was not established as it was felt that national commissioning was a more appropriate route for ensuring consistent availability of certain ultra orphan drugs for rare genetic disorders. I have no plans at present to establish such a system. This position is kept under review in the context of other developments relating to policy on new drugs but has not been the subject of a specific review exercise in 2008.
Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how much Mid Essex primary care trust received per capita in the latest period for which figures are available; 
(2) what the average level of per capita funding for primary care trusts in England was in the latest period for which figures are available; 
(3) which primary care trusts received (a) the highest and (b) the lowest level of per capita funding in the latest period for which figures are available. 
The latest year for which data are available is 2008-09. Table 1 as follows provides the
revenue allocation per head of unweighted population made to Mid Essex primary care trust (PCT) for 2008-09, and it also includes the average level of funding per capita for PCTs in England for the same period.
Table 2 as follows shows the PCTs receiving the highest and the lowest level of funding per capita in 2008-09.
|2008-09 allocation per head (£)|
|PCT||2008-09 allocation per head (£)||Rank of allocation per head|
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much has been allocated to be spent per head of population to primary care trusts in (a) England, (b) Yorkshire and the Humber and (c) North Yorkshire and York primary care trust area for 2008-09; what account is taken of the (i) rurality and (ii) sparsity of population in setting the spending per head of population in York and North Yorkshire; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Bradshaw: The following provides the revenue allocation per head of unweighted population made to England, Yorkshire and the Humberside strategic health authority (SHA), and North Yorkshire and York primary care trust (PCT) for 2008-09.
|2008-09 allocation per head (£)|
The funding formula introduced in 2003-04 and used in the 2008-09 PCT revenue allocations, provides the best available measure of health need in all areas. In calculating health need in rural areas it takes account of the effects of access, transport and poverty.
The development of the formula is continuously overseen by the Advisory Committee on resource allocation (ACRA). ACRA is an independent body made up of national health service managers, academics and general practitioners. ACRA has looked at the issue of rurality on many occasions and has considered rural issues as part of its current work programme, which is in place to support revenue allocations to PCTs post 2008-09.
The aim is to announce the outcome of ACRA's review of the formula alongside revenue allocations to PCTs for 2009-10 and 2010-11 before the summer recess.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the Answer of 9th May 2008, Official Report, column 1260W, on the NHS: information and communications technology, whether the reset process can be used to increase the value of his Department's supplier contract with Fujitsu. 
Mr. Bradshaw: The contract reset process allows for the option of agreeing enhancements to existing services or functionality that need to be supported by a business case and to be approved through normal governance processes. Such changes would be properly reflected in the total contract value.
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recommendations (a) his Department and (b) the National Patient Safety Agency has made to the NHS on hand infection control against the spread of norovirus. 
Ann Keen: The Department advice is to follow existing professional guidance(1,2) which advocates enhanced handwashing.
The National Patient Safety Agency has ongoing communications with the national health service about hand infection control via the cleanyourhands campaign. The campaign implementation guidance and materials advocate using soap and water in situations where vomiting and diarrhoea are prevalent, for example norovirus and Clostridium difficile cases, or when hands are visibly soiled.
(1) The Journal of Hospital Infectionepic2: National Evidence-Based Guidelines for Preventing Healthcare-Associated Infections in NHS Hospitals in England. www.epic.tvu.ac.uk/PDF%20Files/epic2/epic2-final.pdf
(2) Preventing person-to-person spread following gastrointestinal infections: guidelines for public health physicians and environmental health officers Prepared by a Working Group of the former PHLS Advisory Committee on Gastrointestinal Infections Communicable Disease and Public Health 2004; 7 (4): 362. www.hpa.org.uk/cdph/issues/CDPHvol7/No4/guidelines2_ 4_04.pdf
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what discussions his Department has had with foreign counterparts on methods for tackling MRSA. 
Ann Keen: Our strategy on healthcare associated infection Clean, safe care is based on the best available evidence from both the United Kingdom and elsewhere. To achieve this departmental officials have regular contact with experts both here and abroad. For example Professor Duerden, the Inspector of Microbiology and Infection Control was one of several UK and European experts speaking about the control of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus at the Society of General Microbiology international conference in April 2008.
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many products were recommended to his Department by the Rapid Review Panel for (a) development for use in the NHS and (b) for trial in an NHS clinical setting in the last year for which information is available. 
Ann Keen: The Rapid Review Panel (RRP) has reviewed 37 products in three meetings since May 2007.
Four products have demonstrated sufficient basic research and development, validation and recent in-use evaluations to enable the RRP to make a recommendation to the Department that the product should be made available to national health service bodies. This is a recommendation one.
Four products have been awarded a recommendation two stating that basic research and development has been completed and the product may have potential value; in use evaluations/trials are now needed in an NHS clinical setting. However, it is not within the remit of the RRP to clinically evaluate or undertake the evaluation of products within the NHS.
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Health under what circumstances a product or treatment may bypass a Rapid Review Panel assessment; and which (a) products and (b) treatments did so in each of the last three years for which information is available. 
Ann Keen: The Rapid Review Panel (RRP) was convened by the Health Protection Agency (HPA) at the request of the Department. The RRP's role, as defined by the HPA and the Department, is
'to provide a prompt assessment of new and novel equipment, materials and other products or protocols that may be of value to the national health service in improving hospital infection control and reducing hospital acquired infections'.
Products do not bypass the RRP although some may fall outside the remit of the RRP.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much was recovered by hospitals from insurers towards the cost of treatment of persons injured in road accidents in each of the last five years for which figures are available. 
Mr. Bradshaw: The information requested is shown in the following table.
|Amounts recovered under the national health service injury cost recovery (ICR) schemes from 2003-04 to 2007-08|
|(1) The ICR scheme was expanded on 29 January 2007 to include all successful personal injury claims not just those arising from road traffic accidents. Figures for 2006-07 and 2007-08 include all recoveries under the expanded scheme.|
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average time was for a claim for clinical negligence against his Department to be resolved in (a) the latest period for which figures are available and (b) 1997; and if he will make a statement. 
Ann Keen: In 2007-08, the average time for the NHS Litigation Authority (NHSLA) to resolve a claim was 1.50 years for claims under the Clinical Negligence Scheme for Trusts (CNST) and 5.36 years for claims under the Existing Liabilities Scheme (ELS) or the Ex-Regional Health Authorities Scheme (Ex-RHA).
Data for 1997-98 are not available as the NHSLA did not record date of settlement on their database until July 2000. The earliest year for which data can be provided for comparison is 2001-02, where the average time for the NHSLA to resolve a claim under CNST was 1.39 years and 3.67 years for ELS/Ex-RHA.
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of contracts in the NHS were awarded to non-British companies in each of the last five years; and what the value of these contracts was. 
Mr. Bradshaw: The proportion of contracts in the national health service given to non-British companies and the total value of these contracts is not held centrally.
Ms Gisela Stuart: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many NHS student bursaries have been granted in the last five years; how many were granted to students from outside the EU; and how many people in receipt of such grants are working within the NHS. 
Ann Keen: The number of national health service bursary holders for the academic years 2002 to 2007 (to date) are as follows:
National Health Service Business Services Authority Student Bursaries Unit.
Information about bursaries granted to students outside the European Union is not available. However, in order to be eligible for NHS bursary support, students offered a place on a NHS commissioned programme must be able to satisfy requirements of residency within the United Kingdom.
Information about how many people in receipt of NHS bursary awards are working in the NHS is not available.
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) pursuant to the Answer of 22nd March 2007, Official Report, columns 1141-2W, on NHS: working hours, what monitoring of NHS readiness his Department has undertaken; and if he will place in the Library the results of such monitoring; 
(2) what percentage of junior doctors worked a (a) 48 hour week, (b) 48 to 52 hour week, (c) 52 to 58 hour week and (d) 58 to 62 hour week in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Ann Keen: European working time directive (EWTD) monitoring information is not collected centrally. It is the responsibility of local employers to implement EWTD as part of their health and safety obligations.
Under the new deal contract for doctors in training, working hours monitoring information is collected by NHS Employers. The latest figures can be accessed on their website via www.nhsemployers.org/pay-conditions/pay-conditions-467.cfm. The new deal monitoring information provides a proxy to help the national health service with EWTD planning.
Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much was spent on NHS weight management programmes was in each primary care trust in each of the last three years. 
Dawn Primarolo: It is up to primary care trusts (PCTs) to identify local priorities, with their partners, and to commission services accordingly. Figures on spend by PCTs on weight management programmes have not been collated centrally over the last three years so this information is not available. We have provided new money to PCTs from 2008-09 to take action on obesity as part of the overall allocations to the national health service. Levels of expenditure on weight management programmes will remain a matter for local areas.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|