UK Air Ambulance night flights
Thread Starter
It does seem however that some services are more efficient than others... After all it seems Thames Valley service spends more on the admin of the charity than the services it provides, whilst Midlands service costs almost nothing in comparison.. Does make you wonder.
SARWannabe - do you really think anyone has done a proper analysis of the medical need for this? Of course not. Senior ambulance officers have worked out that they can remove x front line vehicles and save y pounds. There has been no analysis or cost benefit ratios because the Sheffield study shows is is not economic.
As to are operations being undertaken - have you heard of waiting lists - you restrict the capacity and the patients back up. The social services budget ('benefits') are no more relevant than expenditure on MOD. The fact is that that £5 million could be diverted via charities to other NHS work (which is what HEMS is!!!) to greater effect. For example a charity recently spent less than £4m to install a Cyberknife at a major London Teaching Hospital. It will treat up to 400 patients with cancer a year and 'save' perhaps 200 lives. Now if cornwall AA Trust decided to stop funding HEMS and raise money for a Cyberknife ( the closest one to Cornwall is in London) would they be saving more lives or less lives? Doing more good or less good? If the local BBC news station or the times publicised these issues......
Yes there are serious shortfalls in the NHS and they wont disappear in today's economic climate by a bit of lobbying. It is fantastic that the NHS doesnt have to pay for HEMS as this would further strain funds. However, spending more and more on bigger and cleverer aircraft with no evidence of benefit and no consideration of the effect on other charities should be criticised as much as profligate waste. We need to ensure every penny raised by these charities is used to the maximum effect, complain when money is misdirected or wasted, and seek to save as many lives as possible with the finite amount the public are willing to contribute.
As to are operations being undertaken - have you heard of waiting lists - you restrict the capacity and the patients back up. The social services budget ('benefits') are no more relevant than expenditure on MOD. The fact is that that £5 million could be diverted via charities to other NHS work (which is what HEMS is!!!) to greater effect. For example a charity recently spent less than £4m to install a Cyberknife at a major London Teaching Hospital. It will treat up to 400 patients with cancer a year and 'save' perhaps 200 lives. Now if cornwall AA Trust decided to stop funding HEMS and raise money for a Cyberknife ( the closest one to Cornwall is in London) would they be saving more lives or less lives? Doing more good or less good? If the local BBC news station or the times publicised these issues......
Yes there are serious shortfalls in the NHS and they wont disappear in today's economic climate by a bit of lobbying. It is fantastic that the NHS doesnt have to pay for HEMS as this would further strain funds. However, spending more and more on bigger and cleverer aircraft with no evidence of benefit and no consideration of the effect on other charities should be criticised as much as profligate waste. We need to ensure every penny raised by these charities is used to the maximum effect, complain when money is misdirected or wasted, and seek to save as many lives as possible with the finite amount the public are willing to contribute.
Amazingly enough, with all modern technology available, you use a thick curtain.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Liverpool based Geordie, so calm down, calm down kidda!!
Age: 60
Posts: 2,052
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
6 Posts
Pitts, of course you are correct about admin costs. What your post identifies is that there are two seperate issues here and it is worth putting some space between them.
Offering a night service is not a misuse of funds, it is using the funds in the way the trustees see as their vision for the future. Period.
Big space.......
Administration is another thing, where I am with you 100%. Charities SHOULD be honest and open with their admin costs. The children's air ambulance having dance lessons from the stars of strictly come dancing at a cost of thousands made my blood boil. (If the tv documentary was correct of course). Employing family is another thing, absolutely fine if they can do the job well. If you own a business you can employ who you like and TRUST. Why not?
Offering a night service is not a misuse of funds, it is using the funds in the way the trustees see as their vision for the future. Period.
Big space.......
Administration is another thing, where I am with you 100%. Charities SHOULD be honest and open with their admin costs. The children's air ambulance having dance lessons from the stars of strictly come dancing at a cost of thousands made my blood boil. (If the tv documentary was correct of course). Employing family is another thing, absolutely fine if they can do the job well. If you own a business you can employ who you like and TRUST. Why not?
Thread Starter
Hey all is cool, its interesting to get the views but I'm surprised that there is no general view from the industry.
In my view it suggests that the reason you are moving to night operation is because there is little risk (either capital or human) for the reward.
Without quantifying what the reward is it just seems (given the wide and differing views on how easy or hard night operations will be practically) a waste of time.
Although what I can see is the PR value.
In my view it suggests that the reason you are moving to night operation is because there is little risk (either capital or human) for the reward.
Without quantifying what the reward is it just seems (given the wide and differing views on how easy or hard night operations will be practically) a waste of time.
Although what I can see is the PR value.
Air Pig, quite a lot of inter-hospital transfers, both day and night, are conducted by SAR helicopters and these are paid for by the NHS.
Something the size of a Sea King or S92 can carry transfer teams and equipment over surprisingly long distances and has the added advantage of landing at or very near to the hospital rather than an airport.
I think one advantage of AA night operations will be not turning into a pumpkin at nightfall which limits their availability, especially in the winter months.
Something the size of a Sea King or S92 can carry transfer teams and equipment over surprisingly long distances and has the added advantage of landing at or very near to the hospital rather than an airport.
I think one advantage of AA night operations will be not turning into a pumpkin at nightfall which limits their availability, especially in the winter months.
Air pig - your post is all supposition.
Thread Starter
There is only any real positive PR value from this if the increased capacity is seen to help improve the chances/quality of life for a greater number of people who are in need to trauma help, which is subsequently provided by the services added capacity. If this is that case there is PR value, and there is true added value also. If this doesn't happen there wont be any PR value, and I would have thought it might well be dropped - "We can operate 24hrs at an increased cost, but we weren't needed" probably wouldn't be much in the way of positive PR. Let them try it, and see what outcome it has, we'll be better positioned to review the effectiveness after a year or so, and the additional costs to those charities of trialling the system will have totalled less than a single top footballer get paid in a year.
When I say PR I mean the ability to make a story, such as "We are the first in the UK to offer night operations, saving lifes across the region,etc,etc.." thus making headlines, local news item etc. Allowing people to rattle the can and stiring people to dig a little deeper, because after all you guys saving lives 24hours a day..
That fact its un-thought out and might add little value is a year down the road and actually who would know anyway!!
Look its cynical but actually when you look at that data there is a lot to be cynical about and the fact that there is little colour around the risk/reward of 24hour operations kind of suggests it in particular is a noble cause that is being done on a more suck it and see basis..
Thread Starter
SAR I didn't know which is why I asked the question the answer today being very different to that of yesterday...
I'm sure that in most regions 24hr coverage is unnecessary, and that those regions that are moving towards it will not be operaring on a whim. they will i'm sure have conducted studies with conclusive evidence on which they are justifying their decisions to operate into the hours of darkness
Thread Starter
Hey SAR - i think we are at cross purposes....
My question was exactly that - what study has been done re: night operations because I'd posed the question that as charities with finite resources it would be sensible to show that you can do more good with the expansion of the service this way - than (for example) just running more of the same in the daytime.
I asked that question because it seemed that one service was pushing forward with 24hrs ops and yet when one asks for the rational there doesn't seem to be much coming back.
As for my data I am talking about the published accounts for these charities and frankly it the charity called the Air Ambulance Service seems to offer poor value for the people who are contributing.
The last set of accounts suggest they spent £453K on office expenses - who knows the detail but actually given there is an Air Ambulance association those involved can't really just sit back and wash their hands of it.
The first thing this association should do is make a standardised template for the accounts so that it is easy and transparant for people to make accurate read-across.
I'm sure those at the coal face do great things but sadly it is too easy for everyone to pull the "just think of the lives we save" card out, whilst at the same time turning a blind eye.
My question was exactly that - what study has been done re: night operations because I'd posed the question that as charities with finite resources it would be sensible to show that you can do more good with the expansion of the service this way - than (for example) just running more of the same in the daytime.
I asked that question because it seemed that one service was pushing forward with 24hrs ops and yet when one asks for the rational there doesn't seem to be much coming back.
As for my data I am talking about the published accounts for these charities and frankly it the charity called the Air Ambulance Service seems to offer poor value for the people who are contributing.
The last set of accounts suggest they spent £453K on office expenses - who knows the detail but actually given there is an Air Ambulance association those involved can't really just sit back and wash their hands of it.
The first thing this association should do is make a standardised template for the accounts so that it is easy and transparant for people to make accurate read-across.
I'm sure those at the coal face do great things but sadly it is too easy for everyone to pull the "just think of the lives we save" card out, whilst at the same time turning a blind eye.
Thread Starter
but the few who are venturing into night HEMS are not going in completely blind
Very good.Yep SAR the running of these operations would make an interesting read.
SAR: I suspect you aren't aware of those people who run the HEMS / AA outfits. Most (if not all) have no aviation background. Most are PR or HR background, some are medical background. The vast majority have little or no business acumen. Before anyone starts - SOME are very savvy, but you could count them on one hand.
What this means is that they are running the arrangement on public sentiment. And if they see the daytime model working [especially if they see the willing volunteers, money pouring in, helicopter companies swooning over themselves to provide turnkey products, councils offering grant aid to set up bases, etc etc; They run hell for leather with it]). And I would say to them: "Why not". It's for a "good cause". Hi tech, public power and no governmental interference is indeed one helluva aphrodisiac. They look up and say: "That's my local air ambulance".
When it comes to extending into night, these 'charity' air ambulance managers see it as a natural extension of their operations. What curbs their enthusiasm of course is the obstacles the CAA throws at them. But they keep trying and as long as the money keeps flowing they come up with solutions (the latest being suitable hems crewpersons / NVD etc). They see it as a growing empire which appears popular, so they don't stop.
What they don't do is a proper business analysis of night HEMS/AA ops. If they did, it simply wouldn't stack up. But the public "appear" to want it, the helicopter lease company want it...emotion wins in the end.
Multiply all the units in England and Wales incomes together and compare it to the life saving returns they produce and you'll soon realise it doen't make any sense at all.
But as long as the public "think" they are in control, they will continue to promote the service in all its fragmented and totally disjointed glory. [Especially when all around them is financially dire - here is one shining light where their hard earned money is literally 'flying high'.
The industry is conducting emotional blackmail..................
We really need a central (independent) audit office which should report and be answerable to the public.
What this means is that they are running the arrangement on public sentiment. And if they see the daytime model working [especially if they see the willing volunteers, money pouring in, helicopter companies swooning over themselves to provide turnkey products, councils offering grant aid to set up bases, etc etc; They run hell for leather with it]). And I would say to them: "Why not". It's for a "good cause". Hi tech, public power and no governmental interference is indeed one helluva aphrodisiac. They look up and say: "That's my local air ambulance".
When it comes to extending into night, these 'charity' air ambulance managers see it as a natural extension of their operations. What curbs their enthusiasm of course is the obstacles the CAA throws at them. But they keep trying and as long as the money keeps flowing they come up with solutions (the latest being suitable hems crewpersons / NVD etc). They see it as a growing empire which appears popular, so they don't stop.
What they don't do is a proper business analysis of night HEMS/AA ops. If they did, it simply wouldn't stack up. But the public "appear" to want it, the helicopter lease company want it...emotion wins in the end.
Multiply all the units in England and Wales incomes together and compare it to the life saving returns they produce and you'll soon realise it doen't make any sense at all.
But as long as the public "think" they are in control, they will continue to promote the service in all its fragmented and totally disjointed glory. [Especially when all around them is financially dire - here is one shining light where their hard earned money is literally 'flying high'.
The industry is conducting emotional blackmail..................
We really need a central (independent) audit office which should report and be answerable to the public.
TC....much closer to the truth than you think there Lad!
Look Westwards for the warning signs of what portends if you do not get it right in Blighty.
Look Westwards for the warning signs of what portends if you do not get it right in Blighty.
Air pig - your post is all supposition.
SAR - I am not sure if you believe this idea of some in depth secret paper showing the benefit of night HEMS, but I am afraid it is just rubbish. There is no published data on the benefits of night flights. Period. The ambulance service may be able to meet their targets with less ground resources but there is no evidence of benefit. If there were any, it would be published as a peer reviewed paper in the medical literature.
And sadly I strongly suspect based on the last 27 years that there wont be any such paper in the future. If only because a proper audit would shut me up!
And sadly I strongly suspect based on the last 27 years that there wont be any such paper in the future. If only because a proper audit would shut me up!
Air Pig - this bit
And this bit
Not facts (maybe your £5000 is correct) just your opinion.
After 2015, the cost will rise as we all know that the service is being 'privatised' to a private contractor.
£5000 per rotor hour, which is bound to rise, also have these costs been written into the new contract, knowing the NHS/MoD I would bet a beer or two they haven't
Thanks for clarifying SAR
So they currently go to x trauma cases a week using a road ambulance or pre care practitioner at say £300 per call. So now they are going to turn out a helicopter with the same or a less well trained medical team (as the helicopter only carries a paramedic not a doctor) for say £1500
So they spend £1200 x per week more but of course it isn't ambulance service money
Yes that sounds like the NHS.
So they currently go to x trauma cases a week using a road ambulance or pre care practitioner at say £300 per call. So now they are going to turn out a helicopter with the same or a less well trained medical team (as the helicopter only carries a paramedic not a doctor) for say £1500
So they spend £1200 x per week more but of course it isn't ambulance service money
Yes that sounds like the NHS.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Under a grey cloud
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not really - in the case I'm talking about they are sending out a car/helicopter (depending on practicality/timings) to arrive on scene within <20 mins, with a specialist registrar/consultant level doctor with extensive A&E experience, and a paramedic, who can provide a much more comprehensive trauma response than the best equipped ambulance service cover. Taking A&E to the patient, with the ability to perform selected roadside operations, administer anaesthetics, induce comas, take the patient quickly to the most suitable trauma/major-trauma hospital, bypass the A&E doctor when reaching the hospital (having made these diagnosis themselves). Which for the selected trauma parients to whom Control deem time-critical/severe enough is a good service, paid for by charitable donation.