NTPF funding halted at second hospital over ‘potential financial irregularities'
The National Treatment Purchase Fund (NTPF) said it had suspended all insourcing work at the public hospital since April 11 and immediately informed the Department of Health and Health Service Executive (HSE).
The matter had been referred to the HSE's internal audit team.
'The board and executive of the NTPF take their responsibilities very seriously and will take whatever actions are necessary to ensure our spend with public hospitals is fully protected for the benefit of public patients,' NTPF chief executive Fiona Brady said.
'Any proven misuse of public money by public institutions will be treated with the gravity it deserves.'
The NTPF, which is a body that arranges external treatments for patients on public hospital waiting lists, has come under scrutiny in recent weeks.
It was reported in the Sunday Times that a consultant breached HSE guidelines by referring patients he was seeing in his public practice to his weekend private clinics, rather than securing earlier treatment for them by referring them to HSE colleagues.
The newspaper said the consultant was paid thousands of euro through the NTPF, and the details were uncovered by an internal investigation by Children's Health Ireland (CHI).
The NTPF said on Wednesday that following a meeting of its board, it would immediately recommence insourcing work with CHI after a review of its assurances.
But it said that the board and executive 'remain deeply concerned' that there had been a breach of its processes by another public body.
It said governance and oversight across its insourcing work with public hospitals – who until now have been responsible for this internal governance – would increase.
As well as notifying the Department of Health and HSE of its decision, the NTPF had also written to all public hospitals with whom it funds insourcing work to obtain further confirmation that all work is carried out in line with the NTPF's processes and procedures.
A deadline of Monday June 16 has been given for the completion of these replies.
'Insourcing work through the NTPF has delivered benefits to thousands of patients in recent years and has a demonstrable impact on waiting times and waiting-list numbers,' Ms Brady said.
'However, it is vital there is public trust and confidence around insourcing with public hospitals.
'It must be remembered that these public hospitals already have clear and established lines of reporting and accountability within the public system and clear obligations to comply with the terms of the signed memorandum of understanding in respect of NTPF-funded work.
'We will now work urgently with the Department of Health and HSE on any additional measures that may be needed to ensure that necessary controls of NTPF-funded initiatives are in place in the public hospitals.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BreakingNews.ie
3 days ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Galway hospital apologises for misdiagnosis of girl's appendicitis as she settles for €64,000
A hospital has apologised to a young girl whose appendicitis was allegedly misdiagnosed and her appendix later ruptured. A letter of apology from University Hospital Galway was read in the High Court as Ariana Mocanu settled a legal action against the HSE for €64,000. Advertisement Her counsel, Jeremy Maher SC, instructed by PBN Litigation, told the court that the girl, who was 7 years old at the time, had at the hospital been incorrectly diagnosed with a urinary tract infection and discharged home after midnight with antibiotics. Nine hours later, Mr Maher said she was brought back to the hospital, but her acute appendicitis had progressed to a perforated appendix and peritonitis, and she required urgent surgery. Mr Maher said the girl's father had on several occasions raised the possibility of appendicitis with the hospital treating medic, but was told it was a urinary tract infection. Mr Justice Paul Coffey was told that liability and causation remained at issue in the case. Advertisement In the letter which was read to the court, University Hospital Galway said Ariana had been assessed by an emergency medicine doctor who formed the opinion based on her presenting complaints that the diagnosis was more likely to be a urinary tract infection rather than appendicitis. 'On this occasion, the diagnosis turned out to be incorrect. The hospital apologises for this initial misdiagnosis,' the letter from the hospital manager, Chris Kane, said. It added: 'We regret what Ariana and her family went through and we wish Ariana and her family the very best.' Mr Maher told the court experts on their side would say there was never a case where she should have been sent home. Advertisement He said the HSE contended surgery would not have been possible before morning at the hospital in any event, which Counsel said he found to be bizarre. Ariana had to have open surgery the next day and counsel said she had shown incredible courage. Outside court, the girl's parents, Diana and Petru Mocanu through solicitor Piarais Neary, said they had brought the case for Ariana and to highlight to other parents the risk of appendicitis and to know the signs and when to seek urgent medical treatment. They said they welcomed the apology after three years. Advertisement Ariana Mocanu, of Gorey, Co Wexford, had through her father, Petru Mocanu, sued the HSE. The little girl had been brought to University Hospital Galway accident and emergency department on July 23rd, 2022, complaining of acute central abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting. In the proceedings, it was claimed there was a failure to take any or any reasonable care for the safety of the little girl and a failure to exercise an appropriate level of care, skill, competence and diligence in or about the diagnosis, assessment, management and treatment of the child when she presented at the hospital emergency department on July 23rd, 2022. The little girl, it was contended, had been subjected to a substandard level of care when she presented at the hospital A&E, and there had been a wrong diagnosis of urinary tract infection. The little girl, it was claimed, had been discharged with a wrong diagnosis and instead she should have been admitted to the hospital. All of the claims were denied. Approving the settlement, Mr Justice Paul Coffey said he was satisfied it was fair and reasonable.
BreakingNews.ie
3 days ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Man settles action against HSE over wife's death at Cork hospital for €90,000
A man who sued over the sudden and unexpected death of his wife at Mallow General Hospital five years ago has settled a High Court action for €90,000. Katherine Heneghan (71), a mother of five and grandmother to 13, died as a result of a blood clot on September 10th, 2020. Advertisement The family's counsel, Dr John O'Mahony SC with Doireann O'Mahony BL, told the High Court there was a 'bed issue' at Cork University Hospital and Mrs Heneghan had been admitted to the Mallow hospital. Dr O'Mahony said it was their case that at Mallow General Hospital the pensioner was allegedly not tested properly and not screened appropriately in relation to blood clots and if she had been given blood thinners she may have survived. Dr O'Mahony said it was a very sad death and Mrs Heneghan was a 'dearly loved wife, mother and grandmother.' The settlement against the HSE is without an admission of liability. Advertisement At the time of her death Mrs Henegan and her husband Philip had been married for 55 years. In the proceedings it was claimed that when Mr Heneghan arrived at Mallow General Hospital on September 10th, he was given the news of his wife's death in a hospital lift by a nurse and he nearly passed out with shock. Philip Heneghan (83), of Mallow, Co Cork, sued the HSE over his wife's death. Mrs Heneghan, who had been complaining of shortness of breath and had a swelling on her leg, was seen at Mallow General Hospital and kept in overnight on September 9th, 2020. Advertisement It was claimed there was no assessment of Mrs Heneghan in relation to the probability of a blood clot by the admitting medical team at the hospital. It was also alleged that if there had been such an assessment it would have become apparent there was a moderate to high risk of the pensioner developing a blood clot. Mrs Heneghan would have survived if the medical team had considered pulmonary embolism as a possible diagnosis, it was claimed. It was also claimed that a breathless patient presenting to a hospital emergency department needs to have a blood clot considered as part of the differential diagnosis, and there was allegedly no documentation that this was considered a possibility in Mrs Heneghan's case. Advertisement Ireland Limerick feud escalates: House demolished after bo... Read More It was further claimed that there was a failure to deliver a reasonable and safe standard of care and a failure to assess for the possibility of a blood clot, and Mrs Heneghan had allegedly been deprived of the chance of survival. It was contended that the news of his wife's sudden death had been delivered unprofessionally, causing Mr Henegan profound shock and distress. All of the claims were denied. Noting the settlement, Mr Justice Paul Coffey conveyed his deepest sympathy to Mr Heneghan and the wider family.
Scottish Sun
4 days ago
- Scottish Sun
Office rights explained: What temperature is too hot to work in?
FEELING HOT HOT HOT Office rights explained: What temperature is too hot to work in? THE UK is basking in glorious sunshine with temperatures set to peak at over 30 degrees Celsius in parts. The Met Office has said a heatwave is "likely" this weekend with sunshine continuing into next week. Advertisement 1 We explain your rights when it comes to working during warmer weather But what are your rights when it comes to working during hot weather? We explain everything you need to know below. What rights do I have if it's too hot in the office? There's no minimum or maximum temperature for offices or other places of work currently defined in law. Employers have to make sure conditions are "reasonable" - but that definition is obviously open to interpretation. Advertisement John Kushnick, legal operations director at National Accident Helpline said: "Temperatures in the workplace are covered by the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, which place a legal obligation on employers to provide a 'reasonable' temperature in the workplace. "They suggest that the minimum temperature in a workplace should be at least 16°C, or if the work involves rigorous physical exertion, it can be 13°C. "Unfortunately, there are no laws which specifically state that workers can stop working if the temperature gets too hot or cold." The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has previously suggested bosses should ensure their workers have access to water and monitor their wellbeing in hot weather. Advertisement Typical symptoms of heat stress are: An inability to concentrate Muscle cramps Heat rash Severe thirst - a late symptom of heat stress Fainting Heat exhaustion - fatigue, giddiness, nausea, headache, moist skin Heat stroke - hot dry skin, confusion, convulsions and eventual loss of consciousness. This is the most severe disorder and can result in death if not detected at an early stage However, if enough members of staff complain about working conditions, bosses should carry out a risk assessment. The HSE says: 'If a significant number of employees are complaining about thermal discomfort, your employer should carry out a risk assessment, and act on the results of that assessment.' John adds: "If an employee feels uncomfortable, then they should speak to their employer as they are obliged to act reasonably and provide a safe working environment." Advertisement If you're a vulnerable staff member - including being menopausal or pregnant - you should take this into account when deciding on a plan of action. You may not get to work from home, though. Instead, the business might provide fans, relax dress codes, turn up the air conditioning, or consider other measures to make things more comfortable. What are the temperature recommendations? The Chartered Institute of Building Services Engineers recommends the following temperatures for different working areas: Advertisement Heavy work in factories: 13°C Light work in factories: 16°C Hospital wards and shops: 18°C Offices and dining rooms: 20°C What are my rights if I need to take public transport? Each transport company sets its own policies - and like with offices, there's no law about temperatures during a heatwave. This can mean that travellers face extremely high temperatures when out and about. For example, in 2018, Londoners complained of 42C temperatures on the Tube. Transport for London however has since said all Tubes will be air-conditioned by 2030. Advertisement If you are travelling on public transport, make sure you bring a bottle of water with you, and if possible, wear cool, loose, and light clothing. People are sharing their best "air con" hacks to keep cool in the heatwave and all you need is a bottle of water. If you're sat at work wincing in pain at sunburn caught over the weekend, here's five ways to soothe it. Keeping safe in the sun Wear clothes and sunglasses that provide sun protection The NHS website recommends wearing a hat that that shades the face, neck and ears and breathable fabrics that do not let the sunlight through. Drink water Staying hydrated in the warmer weather is also important. Be sure to carry a water bottle with you if you are travelling and taking sips throughout the day. Use suncream According to the NHS webiste, adults should aim to apply around 6 to 8 teaspoons of sunscreen if you're covering your entire body. If sunscreen is applied too thinly, the amount of protection it gives is not as effective If you're worried you might not be applying enough SPF30, you could use a sunscreen with a higher SPF.
