Forum Topics

Covid Care Homes

There have been quite a few (very justified) negative comments on care homes/covid/FOI etc on here and i thought i'd make a few comments of my own.One of my largest clients is a private care home company, they currently have 10 homes up and running and a pipeline of another 20 or so to open over the next 2 years. My comments below are not PR in anyway, if i thought they were doing a really bad job then i'd say so, there's no benefit in me lying about them.This company locked their homes down a full two weeks before the government brought in the nationwide lockdown and that has massively reduced the incidence of covid in the homes. I'm not sure of the exact figures but each home has certainly had less than 10 infections, 4/10 of them have experienced residents dying but the numbers of deaths are way, way below the average for care homes across the UK. In addition because they locked down so early they have had no recent deaths or infections, i think they've been completely clear now for over a month. They haven't experience any staff deaths.They started sourcing extra PPE pretty close to the start of the crisis, as a private company you would of course expect that. They were also repeatedly assured by the NHS/Gov/whoever the extra PPE was 'on its way', over the course of the weeks it became appararent that is wasn't going to happen in a timely manner. When they did finally receive a batch of face masks the best before labels (showing expiry this year) had been placed over the top of other labels showing expiry in 2016.They also had enquries from the NHS about placing older people currently in hospital (not with covid) in their homes but the NHS refused to test the people they were going to place. The homes rightly refused to take these people without them being tested because of course it would endanger the staff and existing residents.In addition to a massive extra spend on PPE they also spent a fortune on buying tablets (Samsung rather than paracetamol) to help residents stay in touch with relatives via Skype etc. They've also done a lot of work in communicating with relatives on a regular basis, letting them know the number of infections/deaths etc.So yes, there are a lot of bad homes/operators out there but they're not all bad.

Matt Palmer ● 2353d13 Comments ● 2352d

A planned and cautious return for sport

So which events could we be able to watch over the next couple of months? 1 June: A horse racing meeting at Newcastle and Snooker’s Championship League event in Milton Keynes among the first to resume 17 June: Premier League football matches are set to restart with Aston Villa v Sheffield United and Manchester City v Arsenal 26 June: The ‘Battle of the Brits’ tennis event between the nation’s leading men’s players, including Andy and Jamie Murray 8 July: England's three-Test cricket series against West Indies is set to start on 8 July 22 July: Golf’s European Tour season is set to resume in July with a six-week 'UK Swing' tournament Late July/early August: A British Grand Prix double-header at Silverstone Some sports starting next Monday? It does not seem that cautious, and wonder how well planned, it all is.  Social distancing in snooker is perhaps possible.  But for horse racing and football?  Although they talk about sports behind behind closed doors, how do the jockeys and players practice social distancing while racing/playing?  Of course they do not, so, in these cases, social distancing does not apply apparently, though the PM yesterday and Oliver Dowden today stressed the paramount importance of social distancing. Am I being difficult?  Absolutely, but I do not think I am all that incorrect. Today, in response to Chris Mason's question,  Van-Tam says: "The easing of social distancing, the easing of lockdown has to go slowly ... painstakingly. The scientists will continue to give that advice to the government, no apologies for that. "I believe this is also a very dangerous moment. We have to get this right. "Contact tracing has got to go well but the public has got to engage with it." Hmmmmm

Ivonne Holliday ● 2356d3 Comments ● 2356d

The government's terrible performance on care homes

One of the worst aspects of this whole affair is the reckless way in which the government failed to protect residents and workers in care homes: to date, it's that 16,000 residents of care and nursing homes have died so far, compared with fewer than 3,000 in Germany and none in Hong Kong, despite Door Matt's claim that a protective ring was thrown around care homes. The truth, in fact, is that government chose to prioritise testing in the NHS over that in care homes.What seems to have happened is that, in order to protect hospitals from being overwhelmed by covid-19 cases, they were urged to move all possible patients out into the community or, where necessary, to care homes. The guidance issued said that "Unless required to be in hospital ... patients must not remain in an NHS bed ... Based on these criteria, acute and community hospitals must discharge all patients as soon as they are clinically safe to do so. Transfer from the ward should happen within one hour of that decision being made to a designated discharge area. Discharge from hospital should happen as soon after that as possible, normally within2 hours. (COVID-19 Hospital Discharge Service Requirements, 19 March 2020).There doesn't seem to have been any requirement to test patients for covid-19 before discharge, and in fact policy (announced on 28 April) is to test care home staff and residents only once, unless the person subsequently develops symptoms - and MHA, the largest charitable provider of care homes, has reported that tests of nearly 2,700 staff and residents found at least one asymptomatic carrier in every location tested.So, rather than throw a protective ring around care homes, the government has left them to cope on their own without proper protection. That's a real scandal!

Richard Carter ● 2357d14 Comments ● 2356d