I’m on your side, any increase is bad, but those stats do *not* show that “waiting times now up a quarter.”

All other things being equal, the chances of a random patient not beeing seen in 18 weeks has increased by 0.5 percentage points.

Please don’t misrepresent the facts like this.

It looks like LibCon have copied the headline straight from Pulse, but still the headline does not reflect what the statistics show.

This site would probably mock a tabloid newspaper if they failed at statistics like this, so I’m sure the editors will correct the inaccurate headline to something less sensationalist and inaccurate.

andrew f – huh, that’s a wilful misreading, no? Its jumped by.5% out of 2% – so thats a quarter jump in the percentage of non-admitted patients who missed the target.

3 – No, because ‘waiting times’ is not the same thing as ‘proportion of patients seen within 18 weeks’. ‘Waiting times’ means how long you have to wait to be seen, and that clearly hasn’t risen by a quarter.

A bit quick off the mark – but things can only get worse!!! Check my blog, The ToryLib plans will make the GPs the only ones to blame – never mind that the politicians will set the budgets and the rules…….

Unfortunately the RTT stats are no longer accurate. The reason is that they are “referral to treatment time”, ie you have to be referred before the clock starts ticking. Due to the cuts in the NHS, PCTs are writing to GPs asking them to delay referrals for all but the most urgent care until the next financial year. In my county such letters were sent out in October, hence waiting times for those patients will be 6 months on top of whatever RTT figure is calculated. That “waiting list for the waiting list” is not recorded. Sneaky eh?

Two weeks ago a neighbour was told by her GP that he could not refer her until April for the treatment she needed. Our local PCT will now only pay for cancer treatments, fractures and A&E admissions, everything else has to wait until after April. My neighbour’s GP knows that she is in pain, and he is trying as hard as he can to alleviate that pain, but she needs hospital treatment. In desperation, because there’s little he can do, he pointed out to my neighbour that she could get the treatment from a local private hospital. He wants her to have NHS treatment, but since that is being denied her by Lansley, the private route is the only way she can get the care. I think this sums up Lansley’s current plans with underfunding of PCTs: get the private market going before commissioning private care becomes compulsory.

@4. Tim J

No, because ‘waiting times’ is not the same thing as ‘proportion of patients seen within 18 weeks’. ‘Waiting times’ means how long you have to wait to be seen, and that clearly hasn’t risen by a quarter.

As I said above, RTT is no longer an accurate figure. There are now waiting lists for the waiting lists.

However, note that RTT is the median time between referral and being treated. Just as important is the spread, hence why the statistical notices give the 95th percentile.

Blog is http://itsournhs-letssaveit.blogspot.com

if the daily mail had published “NHS waiting times now up by a quarter” followed by the details you posted .. i’d be slagging them off.
Clearly waiting times are not up by a quarter.
it really is misleading in the style of the tabloids.
Come on .. the true picture is bad enough without the embelishments

The hospital still will need to achieve the 18 weeks, as it is in the NHS constitution as a patients right for treatment to start no later than 18 weeks. It not removed from the NHS constitution.