The study published yesterday has made the headlines across the media; ” The study they funded, led by Professor Robert Howard from the Institute of Psychiatry at Kings College London, and published in the New England Journal of Medicine, has concluded that the drugs carry on working in people whose illness has become severe. “For the first time, […]
Continue Reading →NICE, caesarian sections and the weekend press
In May 2011 NICE published draft guidance on caesarian sections which were not medically necessary. The guidance they have drafted is cut and pasted below. Over the weekend there was extensive coverage of the guidance. Here is the Daily Mail, Channel 4 News, The Sun, and the Independent; there was also a Press Association notice. It all […]
Continue Reading →The NHS opened up to devastation
Guardian: “He pointed out that the former prime minister’s abnormal heart rhythms could today be treated by using the telephone to measure the heart beats and give an instant diagnosis, followed by a call from a nurse advising on whether the patient needed to “go to hospital or not”. “You could cut dramatically the number […]
Continue Reading →NICE guidance on ovarian cancer diagnosis
NICE, in new guidance, are telling GPs to perform CA-125 tumour markers in patients with possible ovarian cancer. They say “Asking the right question – first tests Measure serum CA125 in primary care in women with symptoms that suggest ovarian cancer (see section 2.1 on page 43). If serum CA125 is 35 IU/ml or greater, arrange […]
Continue Reading →Is there any need for a listening exercise?
…and I wonder how much this will be costing in expenses. The Coalition is launching a ‘listening exercise‘ into their reforms of the NHS, staffed mainly by management and academics. But have they not already being paying attention? What more do they want? We have already heard from the Chair of the RCGP (who is […]
Continue Reading →Andrew Lansley’s big mistake
NICE is not perfect. It never has been. It has, though, been a good start at trying to examine evidence and come to a fair and equitable decision as to what healthcare interventions to publically fund. NICE has faults. It has become a bit too easy on lobbyists – especially health care charity lobbyists – […]
Continue Reading →Avastin and cost effectiveness
I can’t understand the blame being apportioned in press coverage over NICE’s decision not to fund Avastin, or bevacizumab, for the treatment of advanced bowel cancer. Many patients groups are laying the blame with NICE. Is this fair? The important bit to me is ‘cost effectiveness’. It isn’t about either cost or effectiveness alone. While […]
Continue Reading →NICE and their astonishing view of the clinical relationship
If you are pregnant, NICE want you to given a carbon monoxide test. This test is to see if you smoke. But look at the flowchart on page 11- you are to have this test even if you say you don’t smoke, and even if you say you do. I don’t think this is conducive […]
Continue Reading →What is ‘Bogus’?
Simon Singh, as mentioned before, was in the High Court last week facing the British Chiropractic Association over an article he wrote for the Guardian (which is no longer available to read on their website.) In court, the Judge held that the phrase Singh used – ”happily promotes bogus treatments” – was capable of bearing the meaning that […]
Continue Reading →Cancer drugs: when NICE says no
What happens when NICE says no? If NICE refuses to fund an expensive intervention to treat cancer, but the patient wishes it anyway, the patient must forgo all ‘free’ NHS care and pay for the intervention, plus all the rest of their care – ie be subsequently treated entirely as a private patient. Care then becomes […]
Continue Reading →