[Closed] What Will The NHS Be In 5 Years?

What will the nhs be in 5 years time? It will be Non existent.

More effective at treating people in the right place at the right time, I hope.

Not fussed how they achieve it.

More expensive

Chipping Norton and Skelmersdale

There will still be an NHS come 2020, quite how it will operate is anyone's guess, right now, I would expect local healthcare trusts to be little more than overgrown procurement departments, and flogging various healthcare servicesto them will of course be a fantastic cash cow for those tying themselves in to long contracts.

The whole "austerity" driven privatisation strategy will eventually cost a later administration votes, CMD won't give two craps though will he.

It'll depend how much credit you have on your card or how good your insurance is.

It'll take more than 5 years for them to destroy it but they'll try their best.

Pay as you go NHS.

I've been thinking about it a lot recently, I personally don't think 5 years is long enough to kill it - if it was, it wouldn't have survived the Thatcher years.

The Tories may cut its funding (they'll say they haven't of course) they'll manage to divert its funding to private sector in the name of efficiency that manages to cost more and they'll constantly move the goal posts to make it look worse than it is hoping we'll all beg them to sell it all off - but it won't really matter because Doctors and Nurses don't give a **** about them, genuinely they don't - it's a calling, not a job - Nurses especially like to moan about the NHS, the paper work, the stupid hours the unfathable directives, but they genuinely care about people and thier welfare so they'll carry on doing what they do.

MrsCat is a lifelong NHS worker and fanatically loyal to it but in the past 3 years she has become more disillusioned, the nextt round of cuts may just tip her over the edge.

Better funded than it would have been.

The NHS in five years will be what it is now. A political football with constant government interference trying to make it into something it patently is not and never can be.

Nurses especially like to moan about the NHS, the paper work, the stupid hours the unfathable directives, but they genuinely care about people and thier welfare so they'll carry on doing what they do.

Cycled round our local hospital today, massive amount of empty space just waiting to be redeveloped into housing etc, then all the seperate departments all seperate entrances and car parks to easily be sold off tho private companies, then we have the huge number of super health centres on the wirral all just ready to be sold off. Lots of bits already sold of hotel services, catering /cleaning and laundry, security/pharmacy/ambulance patient transport/dentists/maintance/personel/ and probably soon to folow, OT/Physio, x-ray/scaning/mri,and lots more.

It will still be there and people who continually predict it's down fall because "the Tories are trying to rip it apart" or "labour is distroying the economy and can't afford it" are either scaremongering or deluded, they also do the people who work hard everyday to provide its services a massive disservice.

Unfortunately it will never be good enough, not for lack of good staff I'll add.

There will never be enough money, it's a simple fact. If it had twice the money the situation would not change.

Treatments get better, people will live longer, the longer they live the more treatments they need, treatments get better people live longer.

Cancel one heart transplant how many hips could you replace or extra nurses could you have. It always has and always will be a juggling act and no matter who is charge or how much money it has, it will never be enough and we will complain its going down the pan. But it will still be there.

Would I like to see more spent on it, hell yes, but you can only spend what you have and you can only spend it once, pick what you want to take it from. Glad it's not my choice.

In 2020 there will be a fledgling NHS and a stand alone private service using what is left of the old NHS.

In spite of rumours to the contrary it will still be FREE at point of use.
Probably leaner,
Possibly more efficient,
Hopefully less beuracratic
And regrettably as has been said above still a political football

I expect education to be on its knees too. Some serious shit will hit the fan when the current surge in primary kids hit secondary andcthere arent enough teachers or rooms.

depends if you are in scotland or south of the border 😉

depends if you are in scotland or south of the border

I expect so but the linked nature of funding may scupper Scottish pkans.

We are incredibly fortunate to have such a health service and I echo the comments made by johnikgriff.

I do also feel it needs to change to meet contemporary demands and expectations from staff to patients to politicians. It's very essence, to me, as being 'free at the point of delivery health care' is also it's greatest disservice. I would like to know if any research has been done to look at how we value our health, when we can get fixed for essentially no direct cost to us as a patient. We pay through our taxes and we have to pay tax anyway. I wonder how much the health of the nation would be different if people had to part with money from their own account for every visit they make to their GP?

I understand the French system works with patients claiming their healthcare costs back. Massive amount of bureaucracy so possibly not the best way for us, but I do feel we need to understand how much it costs to run a primary care clinic, let alone secondary care.

Perhaps a capitation system could work for those able to afford a monthly payment that helps to provide a range of primary healthcare services for a community?

Either way, not this time around and I dare say it will be much the same in 5years time.

Probably leaner,
Possibly more efficient,
Hopefully less beuracratic

What does "leaner" mean with respect to the NHS?
How would you suggest that the NHS becomes more efficient - maybe more efficient at driving its staff out of the country.
Less beauracratic - go on then enlighten me.

How would you suggest that the NHS becomes more efficient - maybe more efficient at driving its staff out of the country.

By being better at spending the money they already receive.
By cutting out the pointless departments, directors, managers and their hangers-on that soak up huge amounts of money but serve no particular purpose.
By stopping their suppliers ripping the arse out of them every time the NHS buys something, be it buying in external labour by way of agency staff and contractors or buying in equipment and paying way over the odds for it.

I've worked for the NHS for 10 years or so now and the way that different departments waste money is incredible. If they spent the money they had better then they wouldn't need more money.

The NHS in five years will be what it is now. A political football with constant government interference trying to make it into something it patently is not and never can be.

+1

Like most things someone will find a defect, highlight it and claim the end of civilisation is coming and blame somebody they don't like.

Probably leaner,
Possibly more efficient,

Right - this may turn into a rant, and it may well upset a few people.

The NHS is for people who are ill or injured and cannot deal with it without professional intervention. Patients should not include people who are too pissed to walk home, people who have small cuts, bruises, sprained ankles dead legs, problems conceiving babies, or any other manner of non-life threatening ailments. It also shouldn't be there for people who just want a moan, or cant be arsed to find out how to do something by themselves. If people would take just a little bit of personal responsibility and stop wanting to be spoon fed everything then the NHS's limited resources, including its staff would be less stretched and the levels of care would be better.

An example that I heard about recently in England from an ex colleague: Man in his 50s fell whilst descending out of the attic and got a sore neck. No impact on his head or neck and no whiplash injury. He was blue lighted to the hospital where he had his neck scanned, this scan was then sent to a tertiary neurology centre for a selection of consultant neurologists and neurosurgeons to analyse. He was then advised to wear a hard collar for 8 weeks 24hrs/day and report to hospital twice each week to get the collar inserts changed. This is all fair enough. He was perfectly able to walk to the hospital.

Changing collar inserts is a 2 person job and when everything is taken into account it takes up over an hour of time that could be spent seeing other patients. But that's not really an issue for someone with a broken neck, no matter how minimally broken it is.

Anyway, I've been told that this patient missed his first appointment to get the collar inserts changed, and when he was phoned up he said that he didn't like the collar and had taken it off. My ex-colleague then had to spend the whole day explaning to them the risks of not wearing the collar and convicing them that it was indeed a good idea to keep it on. They patient then said that they couldn't walk to the hospital or get transport and would infact need people to go to him to change his collar inserts.

Bear in mind that it's a two person job, and community physios won't go to people who are able to walk about by themselves. This means that two trained physios from the orthopaedic wards had to go out to this persons home two times each week and change his collar insert for him. This meant that they had to walk to the patients house because they didn't want to use the departmental budget for taxis, and spent a couple of hours out of the department twice a week. That totals up to more than a day per week lost to the department just because some asshat couldn't be arsed to put in a little bit of effort to take a wee bit of responsibility for t eir own health.

As much as I would like to have suggested that they leave the idiot to their own devices and let him paralyse himself - the NHS trust would no doubt have been sued for millions.

People think that they are owed so much in this country when they contribute **** all to it.

wanmankylung - Member
In 2020 there will be a fledgling NHS and a stand alone private service using what is left of the old NHS.

Are you a betting man?

By stopping their suppliers ripping the arse out of them every time the NHS buys something, be it buying in external labour by way of agency staff and contractors or buying in equipment and paying way over the odds for it.

I'll give you the suppliers ripping the arse out of things bit - but newsflash - there is going to be much more ripping the arse out of things with the way the Tories have pushed the thing.

Are you a betting man?

No. I'm not that stupid.

Dunno but I hope that they improve/fix the the way that 101, GP's and A&E work or don't work together.

Dunno but I hope that they improve/fix the the way that 101, GP's and A&E work or don't work together.

How about they have a poster campaign?

Maybe have it something like this:
Thinking of dialling 101 - there's bugger all wrong with you - go away,
Feeling really ill and you dont just think you need help but know you need help - phone GP and get an appointment,
Find someone on the street half dead - get them to A&E.
Everyone else - toughen up princess.

Take it out of political control... it's just a football atm.

Forgetting ideology and political prejudice, just how do you provide a health service for a population who:
a) are getting old and living longer
b) refuse to look after their own health en masse (60+% overweight or obese)
c) are too skint to be able to afford tax increases...

We definitely need reform, don't we? Someone has to bite the bullet and find a cheaper way to do it, somehow?

We definitely need reform, don't we?

[Labour]
No! [b]Our[/b] NHS is perfectly perfect. Evil nasty people want to ruin it. But it's [b]OUR[/b] NHS. Didn't they hear that? It's [b]OUR[/b] ball and we're taking it home if we can't shaft it to hell and back.
[/Labour]

a) are getting old and living longer

The amount of people I have seen who are stuck in hospital when they should be in care homes, simply because the families dont want to lose their inheritence disgusts me. They could take back social care from the private sector, but they wont.

b) refuse to look after their own health en masse (60+% overweight or obese)

Botox is around £70/vial. Botox the pie arms - job jobbed.

Or change the litigious way we live? That way the 101 number wouldn't nearly always result in a visit to the GP or A&E? Or worse, an ambulance being sent out to many people who do not need a lift to A&E.

What Will The NHS Be In 5 Years? - believe the mainstream and it has ring fenced budgets, but tell me a hospital thats not having to save millions each year, my local Southampton performs amazingly but still suffers with having to make crazy budget cuts, they are destine to fail, targets or not, then it's easier to suggest outsourcing (that has proven to fail too). I would love it to survive like it is but yes it needs 3 or 4 times more investment from GP roots upwards.

I suspect it will not be too different from it is now - but will be costing us £7 billion a year more at least. It is in dire need of significant reform and more involvement from private sector service providers, but it won't get it because it is too much of a political hot potato and no politician/PM of any party will have the balls to do what is needed. Instead it will lumber on pretty much unchanged from what it is today, costing us more and more and sucking more and more money and resources from other public service purses, which are already under severe stress and starting to suffer as a result, until at some point it will completely and utterly collapse and need some form of emergency rescue like we did with the banks. And at that point the pro-privatisaion lobby will surface and the NHS will properly be under threat.

I'm Pro-NHS and completely and utterly hate the US system - its cruel, heartless and in this day and age utterly barbaric. But they are polar opposites of a wide and broad spectrum, and there is a middle ground that still delivers a publicly owned and free at the point of use service. Many other countries manage it - there are not many other countries, if any at all, that have a health system the same as ours, but yet are able to deliver a better and more cost effective service.

In order to survive the NHS has to be affordable and sustainable. Its currently not and therefore, I fear, on a one-way course for collapse. It'll probably take another 20 years, but unless we do something in the meantime its inevitable.

The very sick and unhealthy will still die whether we have an NHS or not .The thick will still be uneducated whatever gets done with education

I just hope it still exists....

but everyone seems more interested in getting tax reductions than actually thinking about what their tax pays for.

In order to survive the NHS has to be affordable and sustainable

The other way of looking at this is the demand is neither affordable or sustainable. People are using the NHS when they dont have to.

The NHS is going to be stretched, population growth alone will see to that, health tourism will add to the problem in certain areas, and the biggest issue is the aging population with multiple chronic conditions

Whatever the party in power the NHS will still be lottery, great care mixed in with failing services staffed by teams more interested in Facebook

It will also suffer from the people who for whatever reason abuse the service because they feel they are entitled to.

But it will still be there

It will still be there and people who continually predict it's down fall because "the Tories are trying to rip it apart" or "labour is distroying the economy and can't afford it" are either scaremongering or deluded, they also do the people who work hard everyday to provide its services a massive disservice.

Unfortunately it will never be good enough, not for lack of good staff I'll add.

There will never be enough money, it's a simple fact. If it had twice the money the situation would not change.

Treatments get better, people will live longer, the longer they live the more treatments they need, treatments get better people live longer.

Cancel one heart transplant how many hips could you replace or extra nurses could you have. It always has and always will be a juggling act and no matter who is charge or how much money it has, it will never be enough and we will complain its going down the pan. But it will still be there.

Would I like to see more spent on it, hell yes, but you can only spend what you have and you can only spend it once, pick what you want to take it from. Glad it's not my choice.

The voice of reason thanks johnikgriff.

Fact is the Tories have been in power long enough over the last 66 years to have dismantled the NHS if they thought it would not be political suicide to do so. The NHS isn't going anywhere. What we have to decide is how much of our national wealth we spend on it and what that money gets spent on. Currently we spend 20% of public spending on it. I'd be interested to hear how much people on here think is enough.

In 5 years time the NHS will still be run by too many overpaid & inept 'managers'.
Like most (if not all) other public services.

Fact is the Tories have been in power long enough over the last 66 years to have dismantled the NHS if they thought it would not be political suicide to do so

In the past 66 years they have been buzy & privatised everything else - (except the Forests and they has a dammed go try at that). They have now got the process down to a fine art. Expect pay to be frozen for another 5 years and 7 day a week working introduced without any shift bonuses to force the unions into a confrontation so that we can all blame the lazy shiftless staff and cheer the privatization.

In order to survive the NHS has to be affordable and sustainable

It will have been destroyed by people who would rather undergo intrusive and potentially life threatening surgery than reduce the frequency at which their hand filled with greasy sugary treats reaches their mouth.

Hopefully better...

I work with a lot of healthcare people looking at improvements and lean type stuff (not in the UK) when we deal with those working on the front line it's really hard for them to get a perspective of how things are going overall and how things can be improved. When you can take a view of that and stop them from being flat out for a moment things happen and get better.

Some really simple things like early interventions, keeping people out of hospitals & faster turn arounds make a huge difference. Some of the stuff we have been working on is coming online soon and it will help and make a difference to patients.

Knocking attempts to improve process and make things more efficient is burying your head in the sand. But as usual if you try and suggest spending some money on making the system better you get told how many babies will die for that money, not how many you will save if it's successful.

[i]In 5 years time the NHS will still be run by too many overpaid & inept 'managers'.
Like most (if not all) other public services.
[/i]
Based on working for a year or so in our local one, it already is...

Met one of the managers recently and he had a new +£1k iMac. Year-end money, had to be spent... Nothing really has changed.

there was a doctor on LBC recently, being asked about the current problems.

He said that he gets people phoning up for an appointment within hours of getting a sore throat, whereas in the old days or with any sensible person they might wait a bit to let it run its course, or maybe even treat themselves with something from the chemist.

And then if they don't get some antibiotics prescribed, even though they are told they won't do anything, they will often then go to A&E to try there.

So maybe there should be a campaign of public service broadcasts, like the old green-cross-code man, to try to educate these people - even to explain what a strain they are causing by doing this.

Either that or monitor how many abuses of the NHS they make through their own stupidity, and sterilise them if they keep doing it to stop them breeding and passing on their 'stupid' genes...

And he mentioned the 111 service flooding A&E and the ambulance service for fear of being sued over a mistake.

It will have been destroyed by people who would rather undergo intrusive and potentially life threatening surgery than reduce the frequency at which their hand filled with greasy sugary treats reaches their mouth.

This will play a huge part in any future problems that the NHS encounters with regards spending huge amounts of cash on specific patient groups.
The people who do this will not, of course, take any responsibility for either their own health or the part they play in helping break the NHS. It'll all be the fault of NHS staff and politicians.

there was a doctor on LBC recently, being asked about the current problems.

He said that he gets people phoning up for an appointment within hours of getting a sore throat, whereas in the old days or with any sensible person they might wait a bit to let it run its course, or maybe even treat themselves with something from the chemist.

And then if they don't get some antibiotics prescribed, even though they are told they won't do anything, they will often then go to A&E to try there.

The prats that are doing this who are incapable of thinking for themselves or looking after themselves usually seem to be the ones who, when they can't get antibiotics from the GP, then decide to call 999 for an ambulance to get them to hospital as they claim they're dying/can't afford a taxi/will be seen quicker at A+E etc.

I think that the lack of personal responsibility of a huge part of the population causes probably 50% of the problems the NHS has with regards capacity. Sadly I can't see that changing any time soon.

Still trying to satisfy unlimited demand with limited resources

Hopefully the "debate" on how to address this unsolvable dilemma will move on from lazy talk of privatisation and restricted comparisons with the US. Neither are helpful.

The Swiss, Germans and Dutch have made some progress towards these issue, but we stick our heads in the sand because we claim to have the best system in the world - not really. Meanwhile we have a massive conflict of interest in that isle who benefit form providing alternative private solutions also control the quality if the alternative. You couldn't make it up.....

Its the small differences that you, the end user won't notice at first. As more contracts go to any chosen provider, the treatment you receive will come from a variety of sources. At first things might even get better. I shall share an ambulance based model for you, as thats my area of knowledge, but the same applies across the board and is already active in some areas.

Patient calls 999, requests ambulance, is assessed, triaged and an ambulance is required (this part is hard to privatise as its non profit making).

Using realtime tracking, the system decides which is the nearest appropriate ambulance to the incident (NHS/Bobs blood wagonz/ Mediprofit etc). Dispatcher has no decision over which resource is chosen, the computer decides to keep the market fair.

Ambualnce arrives at scene with no or little decision making around skill set of staff, equipment available, back up available etc.

Small companies won't have the financial capacity to have the range of services and skill that NHS providers do, therefore NHS resources will get tied up on complex/long jobs while small private "transport only" companies will deal with multiple small jobs. Jobs will be chargable at the same rate to prevent providers over using resources to boost profits. AS such, the provider with the minimal level of care/resource/training will make the most money. There is a finite number of jobs available to to compete the NHS will have to undercut its own services, but as a public funded body they will be expected to maintain the uneconomical services as well. Financial constraints will limit services, targets won't be met an NHS services will be further shut down.

Two years ago, with winter constraints we used a private company that sent 10 year old ex NHS emergency ambulances out with trained staff, limited supplies and little patient comeback if there was a problem as they were "representing" the NHS. If there was any kind of problem or they were out of their depth they called for an NHS Paramedic. They used NHS fuel, NHS supplies and Did everything they could to look like NHS staff. We paid hundreds of thousands for this "service".

Now repeat the same for physio (all my NHS physio was with private providers until i needed specialist care, then it was back to the NHS), GP services (OOH is mostly run on private contract), minor injuries (mostly private providers, complex cases/closing time casing get an NHS ambulance to NHS A&E), Counselling, occupational health, occupational therapies, addiction treatment (mostly charity based to be fair), mammography, CT/MRI scanning (thats a treat, "sorry there is no spare parts available for your NHS CT scanner at the moment, but you can hire our mobile unit, complete with staff.."

This is just a view point of local services, I'm sure there is more.

In 5 years I expect I'll be a Paramedic for Bobz Blud Wagonz, on 25% lower salary, paying for all my own equipment, training and development and desperately trying to pay the bills each month.

The prats that are doing this who are incapable of thinking for themselves or looking after themselves usually seem to be the ones who, when they can't get antibiotics from the GP, then decide to call 999 for an ambulance to get them to hospital as they claim they're dying/can't afford a taxi/will be seen quicker at A+E etc.

Flat rate charge to use any NHS service. £25 to see your GP, walk in centre, A and E etc. Been talked about for a while and is already used in other countries so I wouldn't be surprised to see it come in here.

An effective public advertising campaign to help people understand the issue of going to your GP or A and E for minor ailments would be good. Expensive though and is not drugs or nurses so it will be ripped to shreds by the opposition.

Better funded than it would have been.

Not really, all parties were going to ring fence funding. It will be more stretched under the Tories as they'll cut social care more, so the NHS will have to pick up that as well.

Flat rate charge to use any NHS service. £25 to see your GP,

flat rate charge will be no good at deterring the stupid though as they will get their benefits to pay it.

The only answer is shaming - when someone goes into the GP to ask for antibiotics for a cold, the GP can then march them out to the front of the waiting room, where people are already p1ssed off about there being a delay, and the GP then announces that this person is wasting everyones time, and why. Everyone can then point fingers and laugh, and that time-waster won't do it again.

Same deal at A&E, time wasters can be marched out into the waiting room and everyone can laugh at them, even though it might actually be painful for some of the people in A&E to laugh...

In 5 years I expect I'll be a Paramedic for Bobz Blud Wagonz, on 25% lower salary, paying for all my own equipment, training and development and desperately trying to pay the bills each month.

Turnerguy they were probably there as the followed the advice of some here that's it's an accident so go to accident and emergency.

Better funded than it would have been.

This does not necessarily mean that increases in funding mean increases in throughput, quality and treatment outcomes though. These companies need to make a profit to exist, after all. What it does mean is that taxpayers money is being spent in a way which allows much more of it to leave the country through the various companies who are commissioned to do the work. (See railways thread and sncf's investment in uk rail franchises).

Oh and +1 to the bits about social care. Even in children's health where they have parents and families, it is frightening how much even today the poor resourcing of social care adds to the cost of nhs care (most particularly inpatient £1200 a night sort of stuff). Better funding can easily and quckly be swallowed up in delayed discharges or additional 'borderline' admissions which could have actually cost social care far less (if they had it, poor ****ers) to avoid than it subsequently costs nhs england to deal with instead.

"Better funding to nhs" is a poor measure, great for the cover of the Mail, obviously welcomed by those in the nhs but quite simple to see how much more complicated it is than this.

Lying here in a private ward following an operation to correct a fracture that was not treated properly, i'd say the NHS will be as over-stretched as it is now.

Free at the point of delivery is the fundamental tenet. Exactly how this is delivered is the central divisive issue. Personally I believe it needs more management. George had the right idea.

I found Hugh Pym's article [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-32595071 ]here[/url] about UK spending/hospital beds/docs + nurses per capita compared with other OECD countries quite interesting. I don't know about his influences, but the suggestion is to get health care at a level similar to the best performers, significant investment will be needed, and actually the NHS does reasonably well given its resources.

As a paramedic, I echo the concerns above: already we are seeing unidentifiable white vans with AMBULANCE emblazoned on them picking up contract work locally. Staff in green, public none the wiser, but levels of equipment and staff education vastly different to those provided directly by the NHS. Yes, I could set up TomBBludWagon Inc to compete, but in order to make money I would need to undercut, by providing the minimal amount of simple equipment and a couple of stretcher monkeys. This would lead to more admissions to A+E as my staff would not have the education and resources to see and treat/refer elsewhere, and the costs saved by the Ambulance Trust would be a burden on the Acute hospital trust.

In 5 years I expect I'll be a Paramedic for Bobz Blud Wagonz, on 25% lower salary, paying for all my own equipment, training and development and desperately trying to pay the bills each month.

Maybe, maybe not....most PAPs (private ambulance providers) pay more than the NHS.
Most NHS Ambulance Techs/EMTs (the clinical grade lower than a Paramedic for those that dont know) are on band 4 and struggle to make ends meet in the South East, there are private firms recruiting for that role paying £37,000...thats more than most NHS Paramedics!
My hourly rate in the private sector is nearly double what my NHS pay currently provides.....trouble is it would mean leaving the comfort of a public sector pension, sick pay, etc etc

None of us in healthcare are going to be without work, society has become an inverted pyramid that is now top heavy....the over 85s are the fastest growing group in society, for the first time in history the over 60s now outnumber those under 16....these are terrifying statistics as the NHS is truly going to creak and groan under that load....glad i dont have to sort it out.

All you can do is sell yourself to the highest bidder and do your best to look after yourself....as a society we're too fat, too old etc etc....its f@@ked, laugh about it and ride bikes instead!

The Germans have a more accountable system?