|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Australia
& South Pacific
Australian public health specialist:
"Financial cutbacks have lowered the standard of infection
control" in Victoria
By Will Marshall
15 September 1999
Use
this version to print
We now boast one of the best public health systems in
the western world, due to record levels of investment in infrastructure...
Such are the claims of the Victorian Liberal government as it
prepares to go to the polls next Saturday.
But in a letter written to one of the state's major teaching
hospitals, a prominent public health specialist has warned that
the quality of care in the public hospital system has declined
so badly, that he is no longer in a position to defend hospitals
sued by patients who have contracted infections.
Dr Ken Harvey, a senior lecturer in public health at La Trobe
University and a former director of microbiology at the Royal
Melbourne Hospital wrote: I believe there is increasing
evidence that severe financial cutbacks to Victorian public hospitals
have lowered the standard of infection control, increased inappropriate
antibiotic use and reduced the quality of health care. In addition,
this situation has been compounded by managerial practices that
have significantly undermined the morale of the staff that remain.
Harvey pointed out that two of his former colleagues at the
Royal Melbourne Hospital, who were longstanding experts in pharmacy
services, had been sacked after they were asked to implement a
$500,000 budget cut to the areas they administered.
Harvey concluded his letter, declaring In future, given
the current parlous state of Victorian public hospitals, my medico-legal
opinions will be for patients as plaintiff, not for hospitals
and their defence.
A study conducted at Monash Medical Centre in Victoria over
a seven-month period beginning in June 1997, showed that of 356
renal patients, 4.6 per cent had been colonised by Vancomycin
Resistant Enterococci (VRE). Enterococci are gastrointestinal
and genital tract bacteria, some of which are now resistant to
Vancomycin, the most powerful antibiotic used to treat golden-staph.
Results from the study, while not fully confirmed, indicate that
the longer a patient remains in hospital, the greater the likelihood
of picking up VRE. Renal patients who were colonised by VRE had
been in hospital for an average of 17 days, compared to two days
for those who were free from the antibiotic resistant germs.
The problem of bacteria becoming resistant to antibiotics is
a global one. VRE was found to be present in the bowels of 2 percent
to 17 percent of the general community in countries including
the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany and Belgium. In the
US, VRE has become common, and those infected have a much higher
death rate than those infected with antibiotic sensitive bacteria.
The overuse of antibiotics is a major cause of bacteria acquiring
immunity. Natural selection occurs, and the resistant bacteria
tend to survive and multiply. This is especially the case when
a broad spectrum of antibiotic drugs is over-administered, as
this enables bacteria to become immune to several antibiotics
simultaneously.
Once VRE strains emerge in a hospital, their dissemination
can occur through poor infection control. Hospital staff or patients
can unknowingly pick up and spread bacteria from unclean surfaces.
Intensive care, organ transplant, renal, haematology and oncology
patients are most at risk from VRE disease.
Dr Harvey voiced his concerns to the World Socialist Web
Site about the impact of cutbacks in the Victorian health
budget on the hospital environment.
The concerns I had about the use of antibiotics in hospitals,
and the containment of new resistant germs were exacerbated when
colleagues of mine were fired by the director of the North Western
Network. They had said that service would suffer if this type
of budget cut was implemented. They were sacked after saying this.
There are two main ways to approach the problem [of VRE].
Firstly, the prudent use of antibiotics. There have to be audit
guidelines, and pharmacists are crucial to this in order to record
what takes place, and so compare the guidelines with what is actually
occurring.
Pharmacists on a ward talking to doctors play an enormously
important role. But their jobs have been decimated by the cuts
to funding in Victorian hospitals. Now [the government] has announced
that there has to be another 20 per cent cut in this area, on
top of what has already occurred.
Secondly, infection control. Here too, someone who is
overseeing the whole ward and exerts pressure on doctors and nurses
to keep everything clean is so important. They monitor what is
going on and introduce remedial action. Again, when you remove
staff, there is no-one there to stand back and monitor the situation.
The message we got at the Victorian Drug Usage Advisory
Committee conference, where a large multi-disciplinary group of
health professionals discussed the situation, was that many essential
functions in the hospitals have disappeared. What you're left
with is that the people on the grounddoctors, nurses and
othersare coping. But it is only a matter of time. Nothing
happens immediately. Sooner or later, with antibiotic usage getting
worse, there is the possibility of a resistant germ causing a
disaster.
Hospital management say How do you know that this
will occur? You cannot say for sure that this will occur'. But
if you keep cutting back, if you don't listen to the workers at
the workplace, then sooner or later, like the situation that occurred
with the explosion at Esso, a disaster will happen.
If you put administrators in charge of a network with
salaries of $200,000 and a possible bonus of $40,000 per annum,
and they are on short-term contracts, then they are going to be
keen to implement government policies. It is inevitable that they
will want to downsize, and achieve their targets. They become
disinterested in staff and the general well-being of patients.
Within three years such an administrator is gone. They are not
going to be there when the crisis hits. They won't be seen as
responsible.
One of the other problems is that with downsizing, there
is no-one left to actually record what is going on. This is convenient
for the government, as there is no way of actually monitoring
what is going on, as research has been cut to such an extent.
Twenty years ago, I worked under someone who was a bit
eccentric. He would put on white gloves and do random tours of
the hospital. He would check under beds, he would use a ladder
to check various surfaces. He would say, 'dirt equals germs'.
He would say to the cleaners, 'You are the most important people
in the hospital'.
The cut-backs to the cleaning staff have impacted on
hospitals. Now we have contract cleaners in at 3am who are working
to be cost-effective. It's just that it takes time for there to
be established a hard outcome to relate the decline in cleaning
standards with the increase in drug resistant germs. If you have
600 injured and sick people under one roof, they are going to
be breathing out germs, they will shed skin particles, cough and
sneeze. If a doctor or a nurse touches a surface, they can unknowingly
spread something. It has to increase the probability of spreading
infections, if the cleaning isn't as it should be.
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |