Attending: Ashley Scarff, Associate Director of Strategy & Planning, Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust

Ashley Scarff, Associate Director of Strategy & Planning from Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust, provided an update on the development of Pembury Hospital and the provision of maternity services at the hospital. Mr Scarff explained that the project had come together during the last 6 years and that the new hospital provided ground breaking facilities to replace the out-dated facilities at the old Pembury hospital and the Kent & Sussex hospital. The physical transformation of the hospital had been accompanied by substantial service reconfiguration and changes to clinical care pathways. The development had cost £216m and involved the provision of 513 beds. All rooms were single rooms with en-suite facilities which provided a much higher level of dignity for patients and better infection control.  As a PFI scheme the contract ensured that the physical condition of the hospital would be maintained to a very high standard. The hospital had been designed with patient well-being and safety as priorities and the focus was on minimising patient movement. Emergency and planned care had been separated which meant that planned treatments should not be cancelled as a result of emergency care priorities. Trauma and emergency care services had been consolidated at Pembury whilst complex and cancer surgery would be carried out at Maidstone but all other routine services were available at both hospitals. In terms of the services for women and children the importance of the single room environment and the facilities for parents to stay in the same room as their children was an important advantage and the hospital had a state of the art midwifery birthing centre and a paediatric short stay unit for emergency care. The hospital had adopted a system of minimising overnight admissions wherever possible by undertaking clinical assessment by a senior clinician and programming treatment. The hospital had been carefully designed so that types of service were consolidated in a single area and one end of the building was devoted to the care of Women and Children. The Committee saw photographs comparing the new neo-natal and high dependency units, and the wards and single rooms with the old units and Nightingale wards used in the past. The Trust had been very pleased with the success of the phased transfer of services into the new hospital which had begun in January 2011 and been completed in September 2011 and was particularly pleased about the popularity of the Women and Children’s unit.

The Chairman asked whether the Trust had a policy of prioritising local admissions to the maternity unit and also asked whether the services at Crowborough were under threat as this could add to the demand at Pembury. Mr Scarff explained that Crowborough came under a different area and that demand there tended to fluctuate. However it was important that the two facilities worked together and it was hoped that the new GP consortia proposals might help to break-down traditional boundaries. Admissions to Pembury were managed through the Community Admissions Team but there was no policy to prioritise local admissions. Although there had been pressures in terms of demand when the unit first opened this had been managed and was not an issue. A member asked whether any services were still based at the Kent & Sussex Hospital and Mr Scarff confirmed that a few services were still there but that all services would have vacated the site by February 2012.

Members discussed the Travel and Transport Plan for the new hospital and voiced concern about the lack of accessibility by bus from Sevenoaks. Mr Scarff explained that an attempt had been made to balance resources with need and that whilst additional provision could have been negotiated with the bus companies this would have diverted resources away from clinical services and the reality was that most people travelled to the hospital by car. The Trust had however sought to improve its own patient transport services and had provided ample parking facilities at tariffs comparable with other hospitals. Mr Scarff also confirmed that there was sufficient car parking for staff at the hospital and the overflow car park at a neighbouring garden centre. Members felt that transport issues associated with the hospital might be a topic of interest to a future meeting of the Environment Select Committee.

A Member asked whether there were separate facilities for patients suffering still-births or undergoing scans. Mr Scarf explained that the separation of planned and emergency treatment and the use of single rooms was an advantage but that patients had immediate access to theatre and scanning services determined by need and that the hospital also had a separate bereavement suite.

The Chairman thanked Mr Scarff for his presentation and for attending the meeting.

The Chairman advised Members that consideration had been given to inviting a representative from MumsNet to attend the meeting but that this had not been possible. It was suggested that contact could be established outside of the meeting and reported back to the Committee in January.

Action: The Head of Community Development to contact MumsNet and arrange for a group of Members from the Committee to meet with MumsNet. Members will report back to the next meeting.