Art in hospitals...a waste of money?

onlyroz

barbiedoll wrote: »

With regard to the unnecessary blood tests and the like, I'll give you an example. When we book pregnant women into our hospital for their ante-natal care, we take blood samples at the booking appointment. One of these is to ascertain their blood group. This is taken twice during their pregnancy, to make sure that the samples match. If they should need a transfusion during their delivery, it's obviously vital that we get this information matched to the correct patient, two samples means that there is less chance for error. But if a woman has already had one or more babies with us, why do we need to check her blood group twice more? It's not going to spontaneously change since the last time she gave birth. (I know that some women do have full transfusions and their blood group can change but this will have been documented anyway.) I've seen two women today, both of whom have had babies in the past 18 months, both of whom had their blood group listed on their computer records, and both of whom moaned about having more blood tests than they felt was necessary. It's expensive, pointless and a waste of money. Our management are always sending emails asking for suggestions for money-saving ideas, yet they won't even consider this. I just wonder why?

Aren't you also looking for things like anti-D sensitisation?

grumblybum

barbiedoll wrote: »

As an employee of the NHS, I am used to seeing vast amounts of (public) money wasted on a daily basis. From the mammoth I.T projects that never seem to get finished, right down to the pointless blood tests that are performed on practically every patient for no discernible benefit, the money that is squandered really does boggle the mind.

A particular bugbear of mine is the money spent on art in and around hospitals. I'm not talking about the colourful murals and artwork in the childrens wards, I mean the real "arty" stuff that they seem to have a special budget for. The argument used is that it is for the "patient's benefit". I don't know if I'm just a pleb, but have a look at what I see when I go into work in the morning and tell me if you find it uplifting and/or beneficial. Because, to be honest, every time I look at this sculpture, all I notice is two shiny buttocks greeting me whenever I enter or leave the place.

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?q=cross+the+divide+sculpture+picture&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=s8d&sa=X&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&channel=np&biw=1024&bih=629&tbm=isch&prmd=imvnsb&tbnid=9lwZ6yrvK1DvCM:&imgrefurl=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cross_the_Divide.JPG&docid=2T8hb-KCU9lICM&w=2048&h=1536&ei=xuqATpP3DsrNsgbS0fmBDg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=88&vpy=192&dur=1413&hovh=194&hovw=259&tx=140&ty=92&page=2&tbnh=120&tbnw=155&start=16&ndsp=15&ved=1t:429,r:5,s:16

I bet it cost a bloody fortune too! :mad::mad:

Opinions??

Yep, big waste of money

Kaz2904

barbiedoll wrote: »

With regard to the unnecessary blood tests and the like, I'll give you an example. When we book pregnant women into our hospital for their ante-natal care, we take blood samples at the booking appointment. One of these is to ascertain their blood group. This is taken twice during their pregnancy, to make sure that the samples match. If they should need a transfusion during their delivery, it's obviously vital that we get this information matched to the correct patient, two samples means that there is less chance for error. But if a woman has already had one or more babies with us, why do we need to check her blood group twice more? It's not going to spontaneously change since the last time she gave birth. (I know that some women do have full transfusions and their blood group can change but this will have been documented anyway.) I've seen two women today, both of whom have had babies in the past 18 months, both of whom had their blood group listed on their computer records, and both of whom moaned about having more blood tests than they felt was necessary. It's expensive, pointless and a waste of money. Our management are always sending emails asking for suggestions for money-saving ideas, yet they won't even consider this. I just wonder why?

onlyroz wrote: »

Aren't you also looking for things like anti-D sensitisation?

I know that people can get certain issues with immunities building up in their blood. When a blood transfusion is requested, a group and save/ crossmatch (pink top) has to be sent for each group of transfusions. There is a possibility that someone could have had a blood transfusion at their last birth or since then which has given them extra antibodies or they may need special irradiated blood.
You never ever mess around with the safety of blood transfusions, so much can go wrong that it just isn't worth it. Hence the need to keep records for 30 years. This is done by both the transfusion service and the hospital involved.
If a woman were to have exceptionally rare blood issues, it is a possibility that she may need to either go to a bigger/ different hospital in case of the need for transfusion or she might even need to be referred to a large hospital which has large stocks of blood.
Nowt worse than a patient bleeding to death while you are waiting for blood stocks to be transferred from another hospital. Especially if the courier has to take a sample from the patient to the path lab at the other hospital before they are able to collect the needed blood.
Our nearest one is 28 minutes away at night by blue light transfer. Longer in the day.

lizziem_2

barbiedoll wrote: »

Thanks for all of your replies.....Lizzie, you know what I mean about the buttocks then!

Yep, I know exactly what you mean!

barbiedoll wrote: »

I agree that decent art can do an incredible amount of good for hospital visitors, and staff too, come to that. We have some beautiful, original tileworks of fairytale scenes, that were rescued from one of our older buildings and they are just lovely, real pieces of art.

Oh yes I think those are lovely.

barbiedoll wrote: »

With regard to the unnecessary blood tests and the like, I'll give you an example. When we book pregnant women into our hospital for their ante-natal care, we take blood samples at the booking appointment. One of these is to ascertain their blood group. This is taken twice during their pregnancy, to make sure that the samples match. If they should need a transfusion during their delivery, it's obviously vital that we get this information matched to the correct patient, two samples means that there is less chance for error. But if a woman has already had one or more babies with us, why do we need to check her blood group twice more? It's not going to spontaneously change since the last time she gave birth. (I know that some women do have full transfusions and their blood group can change but this will have been documented anyway.) I've seen two women today, both of whom have had babies in the past 18 months, both of whom had their blood group listed on their computer records, and both of whom moaned about having more blood tests than they felt was necessary. It's expensive, pointless and a waste of money. Our management are always sending emails asking for suggestions for money-saving ideas, yet they won't even consider this. I just wonder why?

I know what you mean. I am a type 1 diabetic and go to the hospital to see specialists who do the full range of tests and checks. Yet the GP still persists in posting me out blood test kits and trying to get me to have duplicate tests for them, rather than just picking up a phone or emailing the clinic! And they also force me to have "review appointments" on a regular basis by refusing to dispense my prescription, just in case my diabetes has been miraculously cured! Usually these consist of us sitting there not saying much as nothing has changed, it is a waste of both our time and could easily be done on the phone.

irenee

from Wiki - "This sculpture was commissioned by the Guy's and St. Thomas' Charitable Foundation in association with de Putron Art Consultants"

- Therefore NOT paid for by the NHS

I appreciate the artwork in my local hospital (Frimley Green) which has frequently been donated or has been paid for by the 'hospital friends' - brightens up the boring corridors and waiting areas

Having something to study when waiting for results in the oncology department is a welcome distraction and helps to calm the nerves

Errata

irenee wrote: »

- Therefore NOT paid for by the NHS

I appreciate the artwork in my local hospital (Frimley Green) which has frequently been donated or has been paid for by the 'hospital friends' - brightens up the boring corridors and waiting areas

Having something to study when waiting for results in the oncology department is a welcome distraction and helps to calm the nerves

Thanks for that. I agree that having something creative to look at is a vast improvement on staring at the notices saying 'Abuse of staff will not be tolerated', to which I always want to add 'Unless it's thoroughly deserved'

SueC_2

I'd rather be looking at your sculpture as I arrived for work each day than this hospital I worked at for several years:

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41451000/jpg/_41451734_northwick_pa.jpg

I also know which environment would probably depress me less as an approaching patient.

sassyblue

SueC wrote: »

I'd rather be looking at your sculpture as I arrived for work each day than this hospital I worked at for several years:

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41451000/jpg/_41451734_northwick_pa.jpg

I also know which environment would probably depress me less as an approaching patient.

That does look depressing, poor you. :cool:

Errata

SueC wrote: »

I'd rather be looking at your sculpture as I arrived for work each day than this hospital I worked at for several years:

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41451000/jpg/_41451734_northwick_pa.jpg

I also know which environment would probably depress me less as an approaching patient.

If that's Northwick Park, the best piece of artwork there was for years on the roundabout at the approach to the hospital which read, in very large letters, 'Nicholas Parsons is the opiate of the people'
It always made me smile.

onlyroz

lizziem wrote: »

And they also force me to have "review appointments" on a regular basis by refusing to dispense my prescription, just in case my diabetes has been miraculously cured!

Isn't this more to check whether your condition has got worse? Overall it should cost less to monitor patients on a regular basis, to keep track of their general health and to adjust their prescriptions if necessary, than it would be to treat them if their condition took a turn for the worse.

I for one am glad of the "wasteful" blood tests carried out during the booking appointment for my second pregnancy - because they picked up a condition that they were able to carefully monitor which might otherwise have resulted in major difficulties later in pregnancy.