|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Leech: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 10 November 2008, Official Report, column 826W, on employment of oral health specialists, what steps his Department is taking to implement the recommendations of the Choosing Better Oral Health report. 
Ann Keen: In September 2007 we published Delivering Better Oral Health: An evidence-based toolkit for prevention which contains guidance to dentists and members of dental teams care teams on oral health promotion, prevention of dental disease and advice to primary care trusts on commissioning these services. A copy of the publication has been placed in the Library. Earlier this year the Chief Dental Officer and colleagues contributed to three regional conferences on implementation of the toolkit. Our oral health promotion programme has also included reforming the legislation governing the fluoridation of water to give communities with high levels of dental disease a real option of having their water fluoridated. And we continue to promote the Brushing for Life scheme whereby health visitors and other health professionals give families with young children a free pack containing a tube of fluoridated toothpaste, a toothbrush and a leaflet on oral hygiene. To provide for appropriately trained staff to undertake these tasks we are conducting a review of dental public health capacity which addresses the requirement for consultants in dental public health and oral health improvement officers.
Mr. Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many prescription items have been dispensed (a) by dispensing doctors in Winchester and the Meon Valley and (b) in the community by community pharmacists, appliance contractors and dispensing doctors in Winchester and the Meon Valley in each of the last three years. 
Phil Hope: Data are not collected in the format requested. The number of prescription items that have been dispensed in the community by community pharmacists, appliance contractors and by dispensing doctors is available for primary care trusts (PCTs) in England. The figures are based on a one in 20 sample of prescriptions. It is not possible to separate the figures for community pharmacists and appliance contractors so the combined figure is given in each case. The figures provided are for the PCT which is the closest match to the Winchester and the Meon Valley, namely Hampshire PCT and its predecessor bodies(1).
(1) Hampshire PCT was created on 1 October 2006 from a complete merger of Blackwater Valley and Hart PCT, East Hampshire PCT, Eastleigh and Test Valley South PCT, Fareham and Gosport PCT, Mid-Hampshire PCT, New Forest PCT and North Hampshire PCT.
|Prescription items dispensed||2007||2006||2005|
Prescription Cost Analysis data Exemption Category Estimates, Information Centre for health and social care.
Sir Peter Viggers: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many cases of phenylketonuria have been diagnosed in the last 12 months; and how many of these have led to a grant of disability living allowance. 
Ann Keen: Information on diagnosis is not available in the format requested. However, Hospital Episode Statistics show that in 2006-07 there were 15 finished admission episodes where the primary diagnosis was classic phenylketonuria (PKU). These admissions do not represent the number of inpatients as a patient may have been admitted to hospital more than once. Nor do they represent instances where PKU may have been diagnosed in a primary care setting and the patient was not admitted to hospital for treatment.
Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate his Department has made of the number of 16 to 25 year olds who have been screened for sexually transmitted infections in each strategic health authority area. 
Dawn Primarolo: Data on the number of sexual health screens in genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics by age group are not available centrally. The following table gives the total number of sexual health screens in GUM in 2007 (the latest date for which figures are available), in each strategic health authority (SHA).
In addition to GUM screens, the National Chlamydia Screening programme (NCSP) has been screening for chlamydia since 2003. The following table includes the number of 16 to 24-year-olds tested between 1 January and 30 September 2008, in each SHA.
|SHA Name||Sexual health screens in GUM clinics||Total number of chlamydia tests by the NCSP|
1. The data available from the KC60 statutory returns are for screens and diagnoses made in GUM clinics only. Diagnoses made in other clinical settings, such as general practice, are not recorded in the KC60 dataset.
2. The data available from the KC60 statutory returns are the number of sexual health screens conducted, not the number of patients screened. Individual patients may have had more than one screen throughout the year.
3. Data are by area of GUM clinic and not patients area of residence.
4. The information provided has been adjusted for missing clinic data.
5. Sexual health screens in GUM clinics include a test for chlamydia and gonorrhoea as a minimum. Testing for HIV and syphilis may also be included.
The National Chlamydia Screening Programme Core Dataset
6. The data from the NCSP core dataset are for chlamydia screens made outside of GUM clinics only.
7. The data available from the NCSP are the number of tests conducted and not the number of patients seen.
8. Data are based on SHA of residence.
9. The data presented includes all tests done through the NCSP, which includes screening tests, diagnostic tests, and tests of sexual contacts.
Health Protection Agency, KC60 returns; The National Chlamydia Screening Programme Core Dataset.
Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many inspections of abattoirs were conducted by the Meat Hygiene Service in each of the last five years; and what the average number of inspections was during the period. 
Dawn Primarolo: The Meat Hygiene Service is responsible for official controls in all approved fresh meat establishments including abattoirs. It carries out these controls in abattoirs through ante and post-mortem inspection of every animal/carcase and, through audit, on a risk-based frequency, of operator compliance with all relevant legislation.
Mr. Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average waiting times for (a) heart and (b) cancer operations in the area covered by South Staffordshire primary care trust were in the last 12 months. 
Ann Keen: The information is not collected in the format requested. However, figures for median days waited for a heart operation and finished consultant episodes where a heart operation was the main or secondary procedure where South Staffordshire Primary Care Trust (PCT) was the PCT of responsibility in 2006-07 are shown in the following table.
|National health service hospitals England and activity performed in the independent sector in England commissioned by English NHS.|
|South Staffordshire PCT of responsibility||2006-07|
1. 2006-07 is the most recent currently available annual data.
2. Time waited (days)Time waited statistics from HES are not the same as the published waiting list statistics. HES provides counts and time waited for all patients admitted to hospital within a given period, whereas the published waiting list statistics count those waiting for treatment on a specific date and how long they have been on the waiting list. HES also calculates the time waited as the difference between the admission and decision to admit dates. Unlike published waiting list statistics, this is not adjusted for self-deferrals or periods of medical/social suspension.
3. Finished consultant episode (FCE)An FCE is defined as a period of admitted patient care under one consultant within one health care provider. FCEs are counted against the year in which the FCE finishes. Please note that the figures do not represent the number of patients, as a person may have more than one episode of care within the year.
4. Number of episodes with a (named) main or secondary procedureThese figures represent the number of episodes where the procedure (or intervention) was recorded in any of the 24 (12 from 2002-03 to 2006-07 and four prior to 2002-03) operative procedure fields in a HES record. A record is only included once in each count, even if the procedure is recorded in more than one operative procedure field of the record. Please note that more procedures are carried out than episodes with a main or secondary procedure. For example, patients under going a cataract operation would tend to have at least two proceduresremoval of the faulty lens and the fitting of a new onecounted in a single episode.
5. Main procedureThe main procedure is the first recorded procedure or intervention in the HES data set and is usually the most resource intensive procedure or intervention performed during the episode. It is appropriate to use main procedure when looking at admission details, (eg time waited), but a more complete count of episodes with a particular procedure is obtained by looking at the main and the secondary procedure.
6. Data qualityHES are compiled from data sent by more than 300 NHS trusts and PCTs in England. Data are also received from a number of independent sector organisations for activity commissioned by the English NHS. The Information Centre for health and social care liaises closely with these organisations to encourage submission of complete and valid data and seeks to minimise inaccuracies and the effect of missing and invalid data via HES processes. While this brings about improvement over time, some shortcomings remain.
7. Ungrossed dataFigures have not been adjusted for shortfalls in the data, i.e. the data are ungrossed.
Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), The Information Centre for health and social care.
Statistics on average waiting times for cancer patients and average waiting times for different types of cancer treatment are not collected centrally. Cancer waiting times standards of a maximum wait of 31 days from diagnosis to first cancer treatment, and a maximum wait of 62 days from urgent referral for suspected cancer to first cancer treatment were introduced for all cancer patients from December 2005. In the last quarter (April to June 2008) national performance against these standards was 99.6 per cent. and 97.1 per cent. respectively.
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the (a) number and (b) proportion of persons treated for tuberculosis who were living in (i) private and (ii) social housing in the last year for which figures are available. 
Hugh Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many full-time equivalent (a) medical consultants, (b) other medical staff, (c) nurses, (d) other professional staff, (e) administrative and clerical staff and (f) auxiliary staff were employed by York NHS Trust, excluding those transferred to Selby and York Primary Care Trust, in all its areas of activity in each year since 1996-97. 
Information on national health service staff in the York Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust by main staff group as at 30 September each specified year is shown in the following table. It is not possible to exclude the number of staff who transferred to Selby and York primary care trust.
|n/a = Not applicable. Figures for health care scientists were not separately identifiable until 2003.|
1. In 2002, a number of staff migrated from York Hospitals NHS Trust to form Selby and York PCT. It is impossible to identify and retroactively remove the numbers of these staff from earlier years.
2. Full-time equivalent figures are rounded to the nearest whole number.
3. Work force statistics are compiled from data sent by more than 300 NHS trusts and primary care trusts in England. The Information Centre for health and social care liaises closely with these organisations to encourage submission of complete and valid data and seeks to minimise inaccuracies and the effect of missing and invalid data. Processing methods and procedures are continually being updated to improve data quality. Where this happens, any impact on figures already published will be assessed but unless this is significant at national level, they will not be changed. Where there is impact only at detailed or local level, this will be footnoted in relevant analyses.
1. The Information Centre for health and social care Non-Medical Workforce Census.
2. The Information Centre for health and social care Medical and Dental Workforce Census.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|