Site last updated:
December 2011
Cancer Services Forum currently has 1452 registered members
Cancer Commissioning—at a global and a local level: London Cancer New Drugs Group Annual Meeting
Share
Funding UK cancer services—are there realistic alternatives? contd.
The development of 1-year metrics and patient-reported outcomes (focusing on quality of life and side effects) to measure the success or otherwise of local cancer service provision will be crucial. It will mean moving away from 5-year survival data, thereby minimising the variability in cancer survival rates between PCTs.
Despite increases in NHS funding, the National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death has shown that only 35% of cancer patients who died within 30 days of receiving systemic chemotherapy had been receiving a satisfactory standard of care. Better communication within MDTs and between clinicians and patients at a local level could rectify this sorry state of affairs.
Local investment in ‘medium-ticket’ technology and informatics (e.g. greater use of mobile phones, emails and text messaging to facilitate local diagnostic and treatment strategies) should replace use of unreliable and hugely expensive centralised computer systems.
Greater financial flexibility at a local level would enable patients to have access to new cancer drugs, without IFRs, while improved end-of-life palliative care should be a realistic alternative to expensive chemotherapy, for some patients at least.
Perhaps the biggest challenge facing local services will be closer working with GPs to develop strategies for earlier and more accurate diagnosis of cancer. This alone would have a significant beneficial effect on patient outcomes. The challenge was not to spend more money, more quickly—but to spend what money there is more effectively.
Page 11 of 16
Discussion.