![]() |
|
![]() |
| Paul Burstow MP | <info@paulburstow.org.uk> |
Burstow congratulates staff at Royal Marsden on 'excellent' result4.39.41pm BST (GMT +0100) Mon 16th Oct 2006 Paul Burstow, MP for Sutton and Cheam, has written to staff at Sutton's Royal Marsden Hospital to congratulate them on achieving an 'excellent' rating in the Health Commission's annual health check. The Hospital is one of only two in the country to receive an excellent rating in both of the areas covered by the health check: quality of services and use of resources. Less than one in twenty trusts achieved an excellent rating in either category. The health check is the first systematic assessment across the whole of the NHS which reveals whether trusts meet general standards on issues such as safety, cleanliness and quality of care. The health check was carried out for 570 NHS trusts in England. Trusts were judged on a four-point scale from "excellent" to "weak". However, the health check reveals more worrying news about other health trusts in the Sutton area. Sutton and Merton Primary Care Trust was judged to be fair for quality of service and weak in its financial management. While Epsom & St Helier was rated 'fair' overall, weak areas identified at St Helier included medicines' management, services for children, and admissions management. These fair or weak ratings indicate that the Commission felt that there was either room for improvement or cause for concern. Commenting on the news, Paul Burstow MP said: "I am delighted that staff at the Royal Marsden have been given this recognition for the excellent work which they do." "However, the good news for the Hospital should not distract from the more worrying picture across the area." "The Health Commission's analysis reveals problems at Sutton and Merton and Epsom and St Helier - this checkup shows that our local services are far from healthy."
Bookmark this story at:
"Published and promoted by Ian Munro on behalf of Paul Burstow (Liberal Democrats), both of 312-314 High Street, Sutton, SM1 1PR. The views expressed are those of the party, not of the service provider. |