Stays in hospital- very,very short in this country

We run our beds virtually full.
Other countries have more leeway.
AND we have fewer per 1000 people to start with...

OECD latest:

www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/bdd23022-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/bdd23022-en

Across OECD countries, there were on average 4.3 hospital beds per 1 000 population in 2021 (Figure 5.17). In Korea (12.8 beds per 1 000) and Japan (12.6 per 1 000) rates were much higher. Over half of OECD countries reported between 3 and 8 hospital beds per 1 000 population, with the lowest rates in Mexico, Costa Rica and Colombia.

BMA:

The average number of beds per 1,000 people in OECD EU nations is 5, but the UK has just 2.4.
(Dec 2022)

www.bma.org.uk/advice-and-support/nhs-delivery-and-workforce/pressures/nhs-hospital-beds-data-analysis#:~:text=Hospital%20beds%20per%201%2C000%20inhabitants%3A%20UK%20and%20OECD%20EU%20nations&text=Compared%20to%20other%20nations%2C%20the,the%20UK%20has%20just%202.4.

There is a huge rush to discharge patients here. In our day for joint replacements and out the next. It's not good for people to be lying in bed for long.
The bed blockage relates to long term care if the elderly issues and long stay hospital places for learning disabled adults for whom no safety place cam be found in the community. It all comes down to funding issues for long term care.

Sorry for typos!

Very worrying. I can remember twelve years ago being in hospital after a very tricky hysterectomy. I was in seven days and after the first day up sent home but I was at least allowed the recommmened seven days.

I would want any hospital stay to be as short as possible within safety margins. The risk of catching something or getting an infected wound is very high.

I agree, hospitals though very necessary are dangerous places. The problem lies not with the hospitals themselves but with the care provided in the community, which has been slashed to the point of morbidity.

I know someone who had a terminal illness who waited three days for an end of life package to be put in place so she could go home to die.

She was home less than 24 hours.

The situation is tragic to say the least and only when you or someone you know is affected do you realise how bad things are.

I recently had open heart surgery. I was out of bed on day 2, tottering to the bathroom for a shower on day 3, walking the corridor and up the stairs on day 4 and home on day 5 all the while being monitored 24/7. Once I left the hospital I was on my own, basically cast to the 4 winds & feeling rather vulnerable. Luckily I had caring daughters who moved in. After 10 days I had a problem with the sutures & needed to see my GP or a practice nurse. The surgery ‘triaged’ my request and after 3 WEEKS, I was deemed worthy of an appointment. Aftercare is what is needed even if only to reassure the patient when there are so many questions, strange symptoms and worries.

Yes - the aftercare is so important. Sometimes it is good but sometimes not so good or non existent. It seems to depend on where you live, unfortunately. Bad luck if you live in a country area, not much in the way of help at all.

24 hours post delivery for a normal birth is fine...my DD was discharged after 8 hrs.. far better to be home and away from any risk of infection in a hospital

In the UK you get health visitors after a birth and access to a district nurse if I remember. We get nothing unless you pay to visit a GP and young mums often wouldn’t be able to afford $ 50 plus.

not spaghetti There are 3.6 beds per 1000 people in Scotland .We also have more doctors ,more nurses and more dentists.When it was mentioned on Question Time that Scotland has the best performing NHS of the 4 nations in the UK Fiona Bruce that "proud Scot" (not) told the MP she didn't believe her ...so its fine to say we're lying on the BBC .Even when the facts are available

If it’s anything like the ABC they lie all the time to suit their politics.

paddyann54

*not spaghetti * There are 3.6 beds per 1000 people in Scotland .We also have more doctors ,more nurses and more dentists.When it was mentioned on Question Time that Scotland has the best performing NHS of the 4 nations in the UK Fiona Bruce that "proud Scot" (not) told the MP she didn't believe her ...so its fine to say we're lying on the BBC .Even when the facts are available

There is actually no point in claiming more beds when Scotland has to refer many to specialists in rUK as there are none with the expertise in Scotland. Scots also have very little choice as to where they can be treated, unlike rUK. Unfortunately Scotland's 'more' dentists are doing less and less NHS work.

The OP lives in Australia.

Health care not all sunshine over there, despite our doctors and nurses supposedly moving over there in droves.

nanna8

In the UK you get health visitors after a birth and access to a district nurse if I remember. We get nothing unless you pay to visit a GP and young mums often wouldn’t be able to afford $ 50 plus.

Nanna, I was surprised to read, despite our many similarities, that post natal care is different here over the ditch. Mums and their babies are despatched home way too early imo. often hours after giving birth. But, their midwife (and most seem to have one) does make home visits for several weeks afterwards, then the Plunket nurse takes over the mother and baby care - they see you in Clinic. Plunket invaluable for practical advice, weighing and health checks. GP available of course for sick babies.

Calendargirl

The OP lives in Australia.

Health care not all sunshine over there, despite our doctors and nurses supposedly moving over there in droves.

Quite!
The same in New Zealand too. My daughter is currently working in NZ; she’s a doctor. People have to pay to visit a GP in NZ, they then pay for their medications. GPs have only a limited number of medicines that they can prescribe, and many of the better medicines are only available on a private prescription, which of course means they are much more expensive. Waiting lists are long for hospital treatment, just like the UK. Many people have to go privately treatment. The situation is poor, and yet people in the UK seem to think it’s better than here.

I don’t know. I was in for 3 weeks last year, and when I thought I was miles better and had been told I was ready for discharge, the consultant said they’d like to keep me in a couple more days to make sure - since ‘it was a very nasty infection’. (pneumonia and pleurisy).

I dare say I was lucky but I was only profoundly grateful for the care I received. .

When I had my daughter, 1970s, you were allowed up to 10 days in hospital, I stayed 1 day. So much better now that 6 hrs seems the norm. Giving birth is not an illness, there is no need to stay in hospital if mum and baby are well.

There are so many infections caught in hospitals apart from the lack of staff and inadequate food. After most operations it is better to be up and about and leave the beds for those that need them.

A trouble free Caesarean section, which is major abdominal surgery, have just a 1 or 2 night stay these days as opposed to a fortnight in the 70's. That's all very well if you are getting help at home as community post-natal visits have been drastically cut from daily to a visit for the Guthrie test and a phone number to ring for queries.

keepingquiet

I agree, hospitals though very necessary are dangerous places. The problem lies not with the hospitals themselves but with the care provided in the community, which has been slashed to the point of morbidity.

I know someone who had a terminal illness who waited three days for an end of life package to be put in place so she could go home to die.

She was home less than 24 hours.

The situation is tragic to say the least and only when you or someone you know is affected do you realise how bad things are.

The problem lies not with the hospitals themselves but with the care provided in the community, which has been slashed to the point of morbidity.

Yes - that is the problem.

And I'm not sure it's going to be dealt with by any of the major parties who are focused on cutting waiting-times for appointments and surgeries. All well and good, but if there is little after-care, then this will simply add to the issue.

I really wish the parties, instead of trumpeting forthcoming tax-cuts, or verbally bludgeoning each other's policies, in an effort to woo voters and either stay, or get, in power - would focus on this matter which can, and does, affect just about everyone at some point in their lives.

Moving the deckchairs around, or dragooning pharmacies into the system, whilst cutting spending in order to "do more with less" really isn't working.

You don't have to "throw" money at the problem - but the problem needs to be identified and analysed. But certainly most procedures, systems, services and organisations need properly funding and staffing if they are to function. Any government which is committed to cutting public spending is not going to deal with the matter in any way that will solve the problems, or even begin to solve them. If you reduce everything to the bare minimum, the bare minimum is what you will get. And that's what we have now.

A hospital porter, wheeling me around my local hospital, told me a couple of ghastly stories about patients pitchforked out of hospital in order to free-up beds, only to be blue-lighted back in again basically because they were alone and too ill to look after themselves, and there was no community care to support them. Purely anecdotal, of course, but we all know that it does happen. At what cost to the NHS?

Wow paddyann54 if that's the case then the rest of the UK must be even worse than it seems!

In terms of beds per 1000 I mean

NotSpaghetti it's grim up here!

I don't doubt it Aveline
🙁