Government urged to help save Hinckley hospital frontage
A council leader has written to the health secretary in a bid to preserve the historic frontage of a Hinckley hospital.The NHS Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Integrated Care Board plans to demolish the Victorian frontage of Hinckley and District Hospital, in Mount Road, as part of its proposal to build a new £10.5m day case unit.In May, Stuart Bray, leader of Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council, expressed his "deep disappointment" but the board said it was unable to retain it due to clinical requirements of the development.Now, Bray has asked Wes Streeting to extend the funding deadline to enable time to find a design solution with the board.
The new medical facility is designed to deliver services including gynaecology, urology and plastic surgery and will be linked to the new community diagnostic centre at the site.
In his letter to the health secretary, Bray said he "warmly" welcomed government investment for improved NHS facilities in the town following decades of campaigning, However he also highlighted that the hospital building's facade was part of the town's heritage and the demolition was causing concerns locally.He said he had met with the project team, who informed him any delay or changes to the proposed design would result in the funding being withdrawn."They tell me that your department has set a hard deadline of next spring for spending of the budget on this project," he said."I am therefore writing to ask you to consider asking your officials to work with myself, planning and conservation officers and the local community to look again at the design."At the very least I would ask for a commitment to ensure that the funding for the scheme is safeguarded to enable local discussions to proceed."Bray added he would be happy to discuss the matter with Streeting and invited him to visit Hinckley.
'Benefits outweigh loss'
A planning application to demolish the entire hospital was submitted to the borough council in May.A spokesperson for the board said: "The option of retaining the Victorian frontage of the hospital unfortunately would have meant that the business care objectives and clinical requirements for the development of the new facilities would not be met. "The proposed materials do include reclaimed bricks from the current building and we consider that the heritage impact of the scheme will be outweighed by the benefits to the public."Hinckley and Bosworth MP Dr Luke Evans supported the plans, adding the current building was "no longer fit for purpose"."To ignore the realities facing us and request a delay at such a late stage in the process, after the NHS has put time and money into creating these plans, risks our community losing this funding and access to vital local healthcare services altogether," he said.In response to Bray's letter, the Department of Health said: "We are pleased to be providing more than £7m for a day case unit in Hinckley which will greatly benefit patients and the community."The funding is due to be spent this financial year with delivery scheduled by February 2026."Any requests for further funding or to change or delay the scope of the project, would have to be made through the appropriate channels for consideration.A public consultation on the development ended on 13 June.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Western Telegraph
23 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Alzheimer's and Parkinson's charities identify new ways to reuse current drugs
Experts say that by repurposing drugs, they can 'increase the shots on target' at tackling the diseases. This method of drug development could also reduce the time patients are left waiting for new treatments by up to 10 years, they added. It comes after the NHS spending watchdog rejected the use of new Alzheimer's drugs lecanemab and donanemab for widespread use in the health service. The drugs were approved for use in the UK last year by the UK's medicines regulator but the NHS spending watchdog, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice), said they could not be used in the NHS because the benefits are 'too small' to justify the cost. Now charities Cure Parkinson's and Alzheimer's Research UK have joined forces to find current drugs that may tackle some of the common biology behind both diseases. After presentations to the International Linked Clinical Trials (iLCT), which was set up by Cure Parkinson's over a decade ago, experts from both fields will select the most promising drugs for both Parkinson's and dementia, so they can be moved quickly into clinical trials. Weight loss jabs are already being investigated for their effectiveness in treating symptoms of both diseases and experts hope to uncover more drugs that can have multiple uses. Semaglutide, the active ingredient for weight loss and diabetes drugs Wegovy and Ozempic, is being examined in clinical trials to see whether it can help patients with Alzheimer's disease or Parkinson's. Trial results for the Alzheimer's trial are expected to be published later this year. Dr Sheona Scales, director of research at Alzheimer's Research UK, told the PA news agency that the iLCT project had already been 'hugely successful' with people who have Parkinson's, adding: 'Around 30% of disease modifying therapies that are in clinical trials for Parkinson's disease came through this process. 'What we wanted to do is to build on their knowledge and experience and expertise in order to be able to bring a process similar to that to Alzheimer's disease.' Dr Scales said that there are some 'common grounds' between Parkinson's and Alzheimer's – both are neurodegenerative diseases and have some 'common biological processes' – such as inflammation, mitochondrial dysfunction and 'protein misfolding' – which could be targets for repurposed drugs. 'Getting multiple drugs that are targeting the disease is really important to us,' she said. 'Testing different types of drugs and getting as many shots on target is important.' She said: 'Repurposed drugs have already been demonstrated to be safe for use in humans development of new drugs for different diseases is a long process. 'What essentially bringing repurposed drugs does, is help to accelerate the drug development pipeline – it could save between five and 10 years within that process, compared to taking a new drug through clinical trials for the very first time.' Helen Matthews, chief executive of Cure Parkinson's, said the iLCT was originally set up to identify drugs that can potentially 'slow down, stop or reverse Parkinson's'. She added: 'It was through this programme that we realised that there were so many drugs that were also being looked at in the dementia field and there were commonalities there in terms of the drugs looking to reduce inflammation, or whatever it might be, there were specific pathways that those drugs were working on that could be beneficial for both disease areas. 'So given that we were already doing the (work) every year, it made sense to join forces in this way, just to add efficiencies. 'Because if you're looking at the same drugs, we'll only do that digging once, you know, only do that compilation of the dossiers once, so that you can actually take the learning for both diseases and then actually look and see which might be beneficial.' She said that the 'sharing of knowledge and digging' could also be shared with other disease areas, such as MS. And on lecanemab and donanemab, Dr Scales added: '(These) were the first disease-targeting therapies that have been licensed in the UK, but obviously are not available on the NHS at the moment. 'They showed for the very first time that we were able to alter the course of the disease. 'And what we're looking forward to now is what the next generation of treatments can bring us and how we can target different parts of the disease.' Dr Lucy Devendra, head of research at Alzheimer's Society, said: 'Repurposing medicines which are already known to be safe can help us find new treatments for the diseases that cause dementia much quicker. 'Although it is still early days, it's encouraging to see a renewed focus on this type of research and development.'
The Independent
29 minutes ago
- The Independent
Maternity services in Leeds NHS hospitals downgraded by healthcare regulator
Two maternity services at NHS hospitals in Leeds have seen specific areas of care downgraded by the healthcare regulator for the first time since its founding. Services at Leeds General Infirmary and St James's University Hospital have dropped from an overall rating of good to inadequate after an investigation by the Care and Quality Commission (CQC) into reported issues with the quality of care. Unannounced inspections of maternity and neonatal services at the two hospitals, which come under Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, were made in December and January after whistleblowers, service users and their families raised concerns. It is the first time the CQC has given specific ratings for the sub-department categories of effective, caring and responsive for maternity care as a standalone service. Specific categories for 'safe and well-led' were downgraded to inadequate, while 'effective and caring' was rated as requires improvement and 'responsive' was rated as good. The CQC also rated the two hospitals' neonatal services as inadequate, as they were rated as standalone services for the first time. The regulator found breaches in several areas across the hospitals and their departments. Among the issues identified in maternity wards were dirty areas that put people at risk of infection, medicines being stored unsafely and issues around a 'blame culture' that meant staff stayed quiet about concerns. In neonatal services at both hospitals, leaders had not ensured adequate staff levels with the right qualifications and skills, while there was no designated private space for breastfeeding and equipment was not secured safely, the report said. Ann Ford, CQC's director of operations in the North, said: 'Prior to our visit, we had received a number of concerns from staff, people using the services and their families about the quality of care being delivered, including staff shortages in maternity at both hospitals. 'During the inspection, the concerns were substantiated, and this posed a significant risk to the safety of women, people using these services, and their babies as the staff shortages impacted on the timeliness of the care and support they received.' Ms Ford said staff in the hospitals were working hard to provide good care to patients but 'leaders weren't listening to them' when they identified areas of concern, while she said the fact investigations were not always carried out after incidents had taken place was 'concerning'. Babies were also being transferred between the two hospitals 'when it wasn't safe for them to do so', she added. The overall rating for Leeds General Infirmary declined from good to requires improvement and St James's University Hospital remains rated as requires improvement. The overall rating for the trust remains rated as good. The CQC has told Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust to submit a plan showing what action it is taking in response to these concerns. Katie Warner, an expert medical negligence lawyer at Irwin Mitchell's Leeds office, said the findings would 'understandably cause significant anxiety for families'. 'Our clients have long-held concerns that previous CQC inspection ratings didn't accurately reflect the care on the ground families received, and things were worse than thought,' she said. 'Now that both services have been downgraded overall, our clients are now starting to feel listened to. However, the new ratings also raise serious questions about the standard of care being provided to families.' Professor Phil Wood, chief executive of the trust, said: 'These reports have highlighted significant areas where we need to improve our maternity and neonatal services, and my priority is to make sure we urgently take action to deliver these improvements. 'I want to reassure every family due to have their baby with us in Leeds and any new parents that we are absolutely committed to providing safe, compassionate care. 'We deliver more than 8,500 babies each year and the vast majority of those are safe and positive experiences for our families. But we recognise that's not the experience of all families. 'The loss of any baby is a tragedy, and I am extremely sorry to the families who have lost their babies when receiving care in our hospitals.' Professor Wood said the trust had 'fantastic teams of dedicated, compassionate staff in our maternity and neonatal services', and thanked those who had spoken 'openly and honestly' with the CQC during their inspections. He added: 'I recognise we need to be better at listening to our staff and acting on their concerns and I'm sorry we have fallen short on this. 'I want to reassure staff that they can speak up and will be heard in a supportive way.' The trust has already started making improvements to its services by recruiting 55 midwives since last autumn, while a further 35 newly qualified midwives are due to start later this year and more midwifery leadership roles have been appointed to support our clinical teams, the professor said.
Daily Mail
33 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Top medics issue urgent warning over heart drug taken by millions - as makers AstraZeneca are accused of 'misreporting' safety data
Millions of patients at high risk of a fatal heart attack could be taking a drug that may not even be effective, top doctors have warned. Anti-clotting pill ticagrelor was approved for use on the NHS in 2011 after trials claimed it could prevent one in five deaths after a heart attack. The twice-daily pill, sold as Brilinta, is given to people with acute coronary syndrome —a sudden reduction of blood to the heart—reducing the risk of deadly clots and strokes. Since then, studies have questioned if the AstraZeneca drug is as good as its rivals, such as clopidogrel, with some even suggesting it may even increase the risk of bleeding. Now, experts have discovered 'evidence of serious misreporting' in two clinical trials, pivotal to getting the drug approved in the UK and US, 'raising doubts over its approval'. The BMJ investigation claimed the 'primary endpoint' results—the key measure to determine whether a treatment is effective—for both trials were inaccurately reported in leading cardiology journal Circulation. It also said around a quarter of the readings from machines used in the trials were not included in the data sets, the US medicine's regulator, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) used to approve the drug. Dr Victor Serebruany, an expert in cardiovascular pharmacology at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland, who has been critical of the drug for over a decade said: 'It's been obvious for years that there is something wrong with the data. Since then, studies have questioned if the AstraZeneca drug is as good as its rivals, such as clopidogrel, with some even suggesting it may even increase the risk of bleeding 'That the FDA 's leadership could look past all these problems—on top of the many problems their own reviewers identified and are now being discovered by The BMJ—is unconscionable. 'We all need to know how and why that happened. 'If doctors had known what happened in these trials, they would never have started using ticagrelor.' In order for ticagrelor to get approved, clinical trials had to prove that it was a better drug than competitors in a phase 3 trial. After phase 3 and drug approval, the FDA and MHRA in the UK, continues monitoring it in phase 4 trials, to see if there are any additional problems with the drug. But the BMJ analysis of two phase 2 trial results found there were instances of patients who's blood 'platelet aggregation dramatically increased'. This is where platelets—a type of blood cell—stick together to form clumps which can lead to blood clots, exactly what the drug aims to prevent. It 'suggests incorrect laboratory readings', the BMJ said. Assessing the readings from platelet machines used at the two trial sites, led by cardiologist Dr Paul Gurbel, they also found more than 60 of the 282 readings were not included in the datasets submitted to the FDA. 'The platelet activity levels not entered were significantly higher than those used in the Circulation papers and FDA datasets,' they claimed. 'It is unclear whose blood was sampled, and why those measurements did not contribute to data in either trial.' A spokesperson for the Sinai Center for Thrombosis Research and Drug Development, which Dr Gurbel leads, said: 'Any allegations of any research misconduct in the two studies are baseless and erroneous.' In the UK, the drug is prescribed around 45,000 times per month on the NHS. According to medicines watchdog the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), patients are advised to take the drug twice a day at 90mg for around a year after a heart attack. A lower dose of 60mg, may then be prescribed by doctors for up to a further three years. It may also be taken by those who have suffered a minor stroke or a transient ischaemic attack at 90mg alongside aspirin. The body naturally forms blood clots in order to patch wounds and stop bleeding. But over time, things like age, smoking and excessive weight gain can make blood clots more common. These kinds of clots also become more common after someone has a heart attack or blood vessel disorder, coronary artery disease. When someone overproduces these clots they can clog blood vessels, interrupting blood flow or weakening the walls of blood vessels, causing aneurysms and heart attacks. Circulation and AstraZeneca did not respond to a request for comment from the BMJ. MailOnline has also approached AstraZeneca for comment.
