What the fuck was the point in the Nightingale hospital?

[QOFE]

I just don't understand

I thought it was meant to take coronavirus patients to free up normal hospitals so the NHS didn't grind to a halt?

But I've just read an article saying it's likely to be wound down as it's not taken a new patient in over a week and the most it's ever had was 35, despite having 4000 beds.

But there's thousands of people who haven't been treated or admitted to hospital when they should have been, whilst a dedicated hospital sat empty? Elderly people being sent back to care homes to spread the virus to staff and the other patients due to no space for them to stay in hospital, but an empty hospital that they could have gone to instead?

What's that about then? Like... What was the point?

There are many Clavinova. Even just on MN there have been many reports of people being refused hospital admission because they didn't meet the criteria (which interestingly has now been greatly lowered). Those mumsnetters may not have died but it absolutely has been a big issue that people have not been admitted to hospital early enough.

Then we get care homes which have basically been turned into something akin to death camps during this crisis. People in care homes haven't received treatment regardless of whether it might have saved them and that is reprehensible.

I agree OP.

I'm horrified that the NHS isn't treating people earlier and sending infected people back to care homes because they don't have space but then not using the space they have properly.

It's horrid the way people are being left to die for want of treatment when there's space. It's not just COVID 19 but those with cancer etc.

I hope the current government gets pulled up on this because they've failed us.

ChicChicChicChiclana
here's just one

Yes, I was thinking of that poor woman as well - although it's not really clear from the article why her husband didn't phone 999/111 later in the day or the following morning.

I think it's become apparent that people who are moderately ill but coping ok can suddenly deteriorate - this strange phenomenon of silent hypoxia they've been talking about. So whereas normally a moderately ill person could be expected to either slowly get better or slowly get worse, with time to reassess in the latter case, that's not the way this virus always manifests. So we can perhaps expect countries with a lower bar for admissions have lower rates of deaths.

Admittedly hindsight is a wonderful thing but China's policy was a lot of hospitalisation of moderate cases and CPAP as opposed to waiting for the worst and ventilators, looking at their outcomes (if we choose to believe the figures) might have given us the same steer.

I prefer the fact that thousands more people weren't critical and we didn't need them! Jees what's up with people?

I fear our appalling death toll gives the lie to the 'fact' that 'thousands more people weren't critical and we didn't need them' (the Nightingales).

We only 'didn't need them' because paramedics and 111 were instructed to block admission to ordinary hospitals for any other than those scoring 7+ on the NEWS2 scale being utilised. After publicity about some people being left to die, on 10 April that was revised and they were instructed to admit people with scores of 3-5, similar to other countries with less draconian admissions criteria (and a lower death toll).