I was at the King’s Fund (health think tank) yesterday for a discussion about innovation in the NHS. It’s always interesting to be part of a discussion about healthcare. Partly because I am always the least knowledgeable person in the room when it comes to all kinds of crucial technical points – tariffs, CQUINs and all the other bits of jargon which bamboozle non-NHS folk like me. And partly because I never fail to be shocked by the difference between the cultures of the NHS and social care.
Both sectors talk constantly about the need for integration. And yet we can barely talk the same language. We don’t even appear to share all of the same goals.
An interesting point in Richard Bohmers’s opening presentation at the session, which was a review of innovation in the NHS, included a throwaway point which seemed to me worth some deep thought.
Richard noted that there are tensions in healthcare innovation – between for instance, trying to give people increasingly specialised responses, but also wanting to people to experience one, integrated NHS, not several different organisations. The tension he noted which struck a particular chord with me was the tension between greater efficiency, which can mean things like automated and hi-tech interventions, and our desire to be supported by people who care -in the common sense of the word – not just people who are efficient at caring tasks. Is innovation in the NHS antithetic to compassion? Have we innovated the caring out of the NHS? And if so, how do we make use of technology and whizzy systems thinking in health care provision, but also bring the humanity back in? Interested in your thoughts – a couple more ruminations from this discussion to follow later in the week.
Escaping the invisible asylum 
Great read, Alex. I heard of an interesting concept in America where they are trialling the use of FaceTime to diagnose patients – great use of tech, but does it still have that personal/professional interaction that we long and is it really achievable to the masses? That’s open to debate.
Couldn’t agree more about the tension between efficiency/cost and the human touch. A week’s worth of meals and a microwave or a human deliverer of the meal ? (even if the nutritional content is not as good). High tech usually equals greater energy use, less sustainability, lower human resource – and all this is seen as a good thing. Lower tech means more tasks done by human beings, i.e. more employment, less use of non-renewable products – and maybe a better experience for the patient/ person. I’m developing a Care Community for people with complex nursing needs which will explore these issues, and strive to improve quality of life whlle minimising negative environmental impacts – and using people both paid staff and the residents and their families to do work. Even really simple things like hanging out washing on a nice day instead of using an energy hungry dryer. Instead of reaching for pharmaceutical answers to problems like sleeplessness and anxiety, to go for a gentle massage, a sympathetic ear, little changes to the environment to make it more comfortable for the person, e.g. arrangement of the furniture, lighting, maybe music or maybe quiet.
You can visit my website – http://www.deep-green.org.uk to find out more.