Paul Burstow visits dementia ward at Kings College Hospital

The Minister of State for Care Services, Paul Burstow, visited the Marjory Warren ward in Kings College Hospital in London last week.

The ward has been specially designed for older patients with dementia and delirium, and contains a number of features ranging from artwork, interactive panels and day/night clocks, to handrails and non-slip flooring. The minister was impressed and inspired by the creativity and dedication of the staff who work there.

In this video, Paul Burstow talks about what he sees as some of the keys to excellent care:

  • A personalised approach that focuses on the individual needs of the patients, rather than on the disease alone
  • The integration of health, care and support services – to ensure that services are organised around the needs of the person receiving care

Both personalisation and integration were discussion topics in the Caring for our future engagement that ran at the end of last year.

In the video, Paul Burstow also says that this type of approach to care should become the norm, and should be applied across the future care and support system.

The Government’s plans for the reform of care and support will be set out in a White Paper later in the spring.

In Archive | Tagged , , ,

2 Responses to Paul Burstow visits dementia ward at Kings College Hospital

  1. Amit says:

    user-involvement, support trekowns, a system that is unburocratic and decent funding are the key aspects for a personalised service. As a disabled person I have been using Direct Payments since the mid-nineties I employ Personal Assistants rather than having agency carers or living in residential care. I work in the field as a personal budget co-ordinator in a user-led disabled persons charity but the majority of peopl on my books use traditional methods of meeting their needs especially agency care.So why aren’t more people trying some of the more innovative ways of meeting needs well there is a real lack of meaningful service user input we are not consulted from the start but after strategies and policies have already gone through several draft stages and a final draft is reached,. There is not much training provided to help people change their mindset we are taliking Social services and users themselves professionals are still paternalistic, and users still think professionals know best. People don’t have a clear idea of what is possible, and more importantly, exactly what their responsibilities are before I recieved my direct payment I went through a 6-weeks course to help me understand possibilities and responsibilities! There is so much burocracy we are now told that we have to use specific support planning documents so much for someone being able to do a support plan in the way that suits the user and there are now restictions on what is an appropriate use of a PB, essentially limiting people to care (agency or private) or certain bits of equipment regardless of whether the more innovative uses put forward are meeting the need in the best way for the individual!As for funding, we have seen tightening elegibility criteria around the country and resource allocation systems that are designed to give the impression that they are taking account of social needs, whereas the only categories that translate into funding are personal and practical care resulting in people only being able to afford survival care . As one of the other respondee has pointed out it is very difficult to get good quality care when you can only offer a pittance in wages!And do I need to point out the decision to replace night assistance to use the toilet with the provision of incontinence pads? How can this possibly be seen as personalisation?These are all trouble spots that need to be addressed in order to really provide the opportunity for service users to design assistance that is really is personalised!The role of current, sucessful users of personalised care services is vital. Provision of peer support groups, service user champions and trainers (for both services users and professional) and service user input at the begining of any strategic decision will inevitably steer the service in the way that users choose and will highlight user issues that might be missed by professions who are on the other end of social care provision. (of course many of the members of my PB user groupl would love to be involved but their care packages aren’t generous enough as accessing the community / education / work score practically nothing on the RAS!)Independent support service are essential a support sevice provided by the same organisation that has to deal with funding restriction, tightening of elegibility criteria and paternalistic practice represent a conflict of interests we have already seen that council-funded support services told that they cannot advocate for the service user!There are no user groups that wouldn’t benefit from personalisation, however there are challenges. People can’t be set up to fail, which often happens where people don’t fully understand the system, and where the system is set up with no flexibility or where everyone has to fit the system, rather than the system fitting the individual. Additionally, development of marketplace needs additional investment, and thought concerning the support that can be given to smakk organisation providing a service and moving off a bllock contract, particularly charities who don’t necessarily have the business acumen of commercial providers.

    • Muhamad says:

      user-involvement, support twkeorns, a system that is unburocratic and decent funding are the key aspects for a personalised service. As a disabled person I have been using Direct Payments since the mid-nineties I employ Personal Assistants rather than having agency carers or living in residential care. I work in the field as a personal budget co-ordinator in a user-led disabled persons charity but the majority of peopl on my books use traditional methods of meeting their needs especially agency care.So why aren’t more people trying some of the more innovative ways of meeting needs well there is a real lack of meaningful service user input we are not consulted from the start but after strategies and policies have already gone through several draft stages and a final draft is reached,. There is not much training provided to help people change their mindset we are taliking Social services and users themselves professionals are still paternalistic, and users still think professionals know best. People don’t have a clear idea of what is possible, and more importantly, exactly what their responsibilities are before I recieved my direct payment I went through a 6-weeks course to help me understand possibilities and responsibilities! There is so much burocracy we are now told that we have to use specific support planning documents so much for someone being able to do a support plan in the way that suits the user and there are now restictions on what is an appropriate use of a PB, essentially limiting people to care (agency or private) or certain bits of equipment regardless of whether the more innovative uses put forward are meeting the need in the best way for the individual!As for funding, we have seen tightening elegibility criteria around the country and resource allocation systems that are designed to give the impression that they are taking account of social needs, whereas the only categories that translate into funding are personal and practical care resulting in people only being able to afford survival care . As one of the other respondee has pointed out it is very difficult to get good quality care when you can only offer a pittance in wages!And do I need to point out the decision to replace night assistance to use the toilet with the provision of incontinence pads? How can this possibly be seen as personalisation?These are all trouble spots that need to be addressed in order to really provide the opportunity for service users to design assistance that is really is personalised!The role of current, sucessful users of personalised care services is vital. Provision of peer support groups, service user champions and trainers (for both services users and professional) and service user input at the begining of any strategic decision will inevitably steer the service in the way that users choose and will highlight user issues that might be missed by professions who are on the other end of social care provision. (of course many of the members of my PB user groupl would love to be involved but their care packages aren’t generous enough as accessing the community / education / work score practically nothing on the RAS!)Independent support service are essential a support sevice provided by the same organisation that has to deal with funding restriction, tightening of elegibility criteria and paternalistic practice represent a conflict of interests we have already seen that council-funded support services told that they cannot advocate for the service user!There are no user groups that wouldn’t benefit from personalisation, however there are challenges. People can’t be set up to fail, which often happens where people don’t fully understand the system, and where the system is set up with no flexibility or where everyone has to fit the system, rather than the system fitting the individual. Additionally, development of marketplace needs additional investment, and thought concerning the support that can be given to smakk organisation providing a service and moving off a bllock contract, particularly charities who don’t necessarily have the business acumen of commercial providers.

Leave a Reply

Leave a comment