Health campaigner 'dismayed' at hospital trust’s response to maternity downgrade

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) also raised concerns about triage processes and management of delays in labour induction after inspecting maternity services at Royal Stoke University Hospital.

The watchdog issued a warning notice to University Hospitals of North Midlands (UHNM) NHS Trust, which runs Royal Stoke, and ordered it to make urgent improvements. At last month’s UHNM board meeting members heard that action was being taken – but positive work had also been highlighted and services were being measured against a different set of standards than previously.

Ian Syme of North Staffordshire Healthwatch, who regularly attends board meetings, has previously asked bosses if they acknowledged mothers and babies had received “suboptimal care”. And he questioned the board’s comments at its July meeting when members met on Wednesday.

Mr Syme said: “The first board meeting I attended at this organisation was August 1997 - 26 years ago. I always thought even back in 1997 that a NHS Trust Board’s priority was and is the provision of safe services to the community and patients it serves – has organisation reputation now superseded that priority?

“Maternity services, rightly so, are under the microscope given significant safety failings in way too many maternity units nationally. England has some of the worst maternal and neonatal mortality in Europe, if not the worst, and the West Midlands region is the worst in England for both maternal and neonatal mortality.

“I was astonished and dismayed at the dialogue and debate at the July board (meeting) re the CQC Maternity report. As an outsider looking in it appeared to me that the board was searching for the excusable and prioritising the limiting of damage to organisation reputation.

“(At the) January board (meeting) the Trust Board confirmed that it was satisfied that the evidence provided demonstrated achievement of the 10 maternity safety actions and provided permission to the chief executive to sign the board declaration form prior to submission to NHS Resolution. Three months later the CQC, your independent regulator, inspect UHNM Maternity Unit (and) after inspection rate UHNM Maternity inadequate for their safe domain.

“In May I questioned the board if in the light of a CQC section 29 letter UHNM acknowledged that too many women have suffered sub-optimal maternity care. The board refuted my assertion at that time.

“In the light of the June CQC report does the board now acknowledge that too many women have indeed suffered sub-optimal care? If not why not – and if so what is now being actioned to apologise to those women?”

Chief executive Tracy Bullock responded: “The CQC report has not made any statements or claims any women have come to harm. What I would say is we do recognise that sometimes women come to harm and we also have patients who are unhappy about the care they receive.

“We investigate all of these incidents and complaints. Where organisations are rated good or outstanding we knock on the door and ask what they are doing to see if there is anything we can learn from that.

“Yes some women are coming to harm but that happens everywhere. Given the number of births we have we are by no means out of kilter and these is not an issue the CQC found.”

Board chairman David Wakefield said: “It’s fair to say as a board we pride ourselves on being open, transparent and very patient-focused. I therefore find your question slightly strange.

“We were clear in acknowledging, as the CQC did, that the standards had changed. We also said we welcomed that and anything that improved safety for women and babies.

“Patient safety is our number one priority. The work around maternity is a big ticket issue and we take it very seriously.

“There are numerous conversations, so don’t for a minute imagine we are blasé about this. It is a real priority here and I believe patients are safe here.”