Are you worried yet.

[RobinL]

Those are numbers in circulation for sure. And another positive is that it's likely you would get up to 90% from the first jab, the second jab is the 'insurance' shot.

But....... the overall effectiveness of the vaccine in a large population must be less.
There will be folk that react badly and/or not at all, there will be folk who can't have the vaccine for any number of reasons, and of course anti-vaxxers.

I'd guess with real effort we'd hit 80% which would be good enough to bring some control of the situation. - here in Britain.

However the connected nature of our world means that we can't consider our success in isolation......let's see how it all plays out but this is going to be a long game for sure!

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk

 

[Zep]

That is for sure. It does now feel a bit more like when, rather than if. Which is good enough right now.

 

[Phil the Brit]

We built Nightingale hospitals at massive expence to the taxpayers, rolled then out in a mass fanfare of publicity and now this.................

One senior doctor said some trusts in the capital and the South East are considering the option of setting up tents outside hospitals – something normally reserved for sudden events such as terror attacks or industrial disasters – to triage patients.
“Medical staff are dealing with queues of ambulances outside many emergency departments, often with patients sat in the ambulances for many hours until they can be offloaded into the department because there simply isn’t any space to put them in.”
My mother in law aged 91 fell over in her flat a couple of days ago and was bleeding from her head. Was told 6 HOUR wait for an ambulance (Colchester Essex).

Someone, (without any political bullsh1t) please give me a correct answer why we are not using NIGHTINGALE HOSPITALS?

 

[CatmanV2]

Someone, (without and political bullsh1t) please give me a correct answer why we are not using NIGHTINGALE HOSPITALS?

Not enough staff, apparently

C

 

[Phil the Brit]

Not enough staff, apparently

C

I read somewhere that earlier in the year the Government put out the call for retired doctors and nurses to come back to help temporarily.
Apparently 35 thousand agreed, but it transpired the other day that only 5000 were contacted. Is there any truth to that? Did someone drop that ball as well?

 

[Wack61]

I read somewhere that earlier in the year the Government put out the call for retired doctors and nurses to come back to help temporarily.
Apparently 35 thousand agreed, but it transpired the other day that only 5000 were contacted. Is there any truth to that? Did someone drop that ball as well?

Unless they retired early and were young, fit and healthy you'd have to be a special kind of person to put yourself into the middle of a pandemic if you were in the vulnerable group, probably why they didn't contact many.

The nightingale hospitals must've been a government idea without consulting anyone as to whether they had the staff to run them, now it looks like they actually need them they've gone ,another waste of ££££

triage should be , you're 85 , sorry we can't save you , there's a woman with 2 young kids that needs the bed.

 

[philw696]

Boris Johnson has said more than once over the last few months that we have more Doctors and Nurses so doesn't make sense to me.

 

[CatmanV2]

I read somewhere that earlier in the year the Government put out the call for retired doctors and nurses to come back to help temporarily.
Apparently 35 thousand agreed, but it transpired the other day that only 5000 were contacted. Is there any truth to that? Did someone drop that ball as well?

I have no first hand data on that, but the apocryphal tales bear it out.
For example recently required GPs volunteering to give vaccines and being required to produce 21 pieces of documentation (including, supposedly, evidence of ant-radicalisation training).
While clearly there must be standards, there appears to be something of a lack of imagination or indeed common sense being applied.
It would not surprise me in the slightest if the number contacted or even being involved are lower. There are plenty of stories (but again with no corroboration) of doctors being told that 'yes' they can act in such and such capacity, and then never being actually given a role. Despite multiple follow ups. The same doctor (writing to a national paper, so take it with as much salt as you need) says he volunteered for track and trace, did all the training, never got the details to log on and do anything (again after multiple chases)
OTOH I know of at least two people that have re-trained / re-focussed their career into healthcare (one in primary care, one into mental health assistance)

So, who knows?

C

 

[CatmanV2]

Boris Johnson has said more than once over the last few months that we have more Doctors and Nurses so doesn't make sense to me.

I believe the number of staff required was something like 17000. That would seem a bit like the snow plough problem, but I am no expert.

C

 

[safrane]

Within my area we also set up a scheme for retired and ex staff.

We found many who had been sacked trying to re-join
Some so ill they would not be able to do the job
Unfit and unable to pass the basic physical
Left so long ago they would need the full 12 weeks training
Quite a number you would not rehire again due to a number of reasons including racist and bigoted behaviour during testing (not covid testing btw)

I would not draw a view on the basis of one said Dr claiming this or that... or whats in a paper, its not like them to want to publish a happy story.

 

[CatmanV2]

Within my area we also set up a scheme for retired and ex staff.

We found many who had been sacked trying to re-join
Some so ill they would not be able to do the job
Unfit and unable to pass the basic physical
Left so long ago they would need the full 12 weeks training
Quite a number you would not rehire again due to a number of reasons including racist and bigoted behaviour during testing (not covid testing btw)

I would not draw a view on the basis of one said Dr claiming this or that... or whats in a paper, its not like them to want to publish a happy story.

Indeed. I tried to make it clear that there was no corroboration, so thanks for adding another perspective.

Interested to know 12 week training for what?

Take the point about racist behaviour, but is it that important if we're talking about (for example) providing vaccinations? Reprehensible for sure, but worth it for a short term gain? Genuinely interested.

C

 

[safrane]

Imagine the litigation if they were found to have been employed by the Gov knowing their were racist and they hurt/abused someone... the employer with be open to unlimited fines.

 

[safrane]

12 weeks because all our staff have to know how to perform the full roll as they would be part of the team and could be exposed to the full rage of issues and emergencies.

It would be impossible to isolate them from the environment I work in.

 

[jasst]

I was speaking with one of my customers today about this very issue, a friend of hers is a retired GP, jumped at the chance to help when the call was put out, only to be told that because they retired more than 2 years ago, they would not be suitable as would need re training, beggars belief.

 

[CatmanV2]

I was speaking with one of my customers today about this very issue, a friend of hers is a retired GP, jumped at the chance to help when the call was put out, only to be told that because they retired more than 2 years ago, they would not be suitable as would need re training, beggars belief.

I confess it does seem a little 'unimaginative'

C

 

[safrane]

if the GMC will not licence them there is nothing the NHS can do.

Since the Shipman murders a Dr has to be revalidated every year and it takes days of their time to get the evidence together to submit.

 

[Ali355]

Nightingales are not hospitals. They are refitted conferencing centres that, with the best will in the world, can not replicate a purpose built icu environment.
The model for the London nightingale was different to all the other regional nightingales, whereby it was set up to be ICU overflow (so treating the sickest patients) rather than step down (treating those that were over the worst but not ready to go home yet). KPMG and/or EY were part of the team that set up the London nightingale. I am not aware of any changes to their clinical model this time round but they are switching it on again.
Here in Yorkshire the Harrogate nightingale was for step down care and seemed to work fine when switched on. But the staff to run it were pinched from all the local trusts, the expectation being that all trusts were going to contribute. I had friends who were deployed to it from hospitals in Leeds, Wakefield, Bradford and Harrogate. Remember that was at a time when elective activity was by in large switched off so there were staff that could be ‘sacrificed’ for the greater good. At the moment we have the situation of a normal NHS winter, ie loads of sick people coming through the door, elective activity broadly still switched on & a huge covid peak on top. Which means the staff can’t be given up to run the nightingales as they are still needed in their base hospitals.
As for the bringing staff back programme- a lot of the training requirements are determined by the professional bodies eg GMC. Without meeting them you have no accreditation, without accreditation no legal indemnity for the trusts that employ the returners. Annoying but necessary. Also if you think about what we really needed - icu trained docs and nurses and the types of folks volunteering to come back - predominantly primary care clinicians, you can see why big numbers of people interested converted to smaller numbers of folks deployed. We sadly also had a few who came back and were exposed to the virus and unfortunately lost their lives which was awful. But it resulted in quite a few folks reconsidering their initial offer to come back. So beyond the headline and the story there were some real practical limitations that meant we didn’t immediately deploy all the folks that expressed an interest.

 

[2b1ask1]

A little more information regarding in particular the London Nightingale: This was indeed set up as an intensive ITU centre at the outset of the pandemic and there was a massive shortage of equipment at that time, Thankfully it wasn't called upon because of lockdown 1 being partly successful in reducing the curve as it was coming together. It has been mothballed during the year as thankfully again our purpose built ITU units have coped. As things have got out of hand again people are looking at the need for the nightingale to be used. The HUGE difference now as opposed to the spring is that we (the world) has got a far better understanding of the virus and how to treat it, in particular how to avoid the need to ventilate and therefore the need for ITU beds and spaces. So the London nightingale is not needed in the 'as built' format, if beds are needed they will be on a 'ward' style layout with fewer staff looking after multiple patients.

 

[CatmanV2]

Nightingales are not hospitals. They are refitted conferencing centres that, with the best will in the world, can not replicate a purpose built icu environment.
The model for the London nightingale was different to all the other regional nightingales, whereby it was set up to be ICU overflow (so treating the sickest patients) rather than step down (treating those that were over the worst but not ready to go home yet). KPMG and/or EY were part of the team that set up the London nightingale. I am not aware of any changes to their clinical model this time round but they are switching it on again.
Here in Yorkshire the Harrogate nightingale was for step down care and seemed to work fine when switched on. But the staff to run it were pinched from all the local trusts, the expectation being that all trusts were going to contribute. I had friends who were deployed to it from hospitals in Leeds, Wakefield, Bradford and Harrogate. Remember that was at a time when elective activity was by in large switched off so there were staff that could be ‘sacrificed’ for the greater good. At the moment we have the situation of a normal NHS winter, ie loads of sick people coming through the door, elective activity broadly still switched on & a huge covid peak on top. Which means the staff can’t be given up to run the nightingales as they are still needed in their base hospitals.
As for the bringing staff back programme- a lot of the training requirements are determined by the professional bodies eg GMC. Without meeting them you have no accreditation, without accreditation no legal indemnity for the trusts that employ the returners. Annoying but necessary. Also if you think about what we really needed - icu trained docs and nurses and the types of folks volunteering to come back - predominantly primary care clinicians, you can see why big numbers of people interested converted to smaller numbers of folks deployed. We sadly also had a few who came back and were exposed to the virus and unfortunately lost their lives which was awful. But it resulted in quite a few folks reconsidering their initial offer to come back. So beyond the headline and the story there were some real practical limitations that meant we didn’t immediately deploy all the folks that expressed an interest.

Appreciate the insight, thanks

C

 

[2b1ask1]

Well to add to the last post I made, Jeanette has just opened a round robin email from the trust and they are opening the London nightingale this week! They are looking to re-purpose staff for it. She hasn’t been on a ward for over 20 years and is presently high matron level equivalent which will be an interesting turn of events.