Eastbourne ‘needs and deserves’ full cardiology services, says council

On Wednesday (February 23), Eastbourne Borough Council backed a cross-party motion calling on East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust (ESHT) not to remove specialist cardiology services from Eastbourne District General Hospital (DGH).

The motion, from Liberal Democrat Josh Babarinde and Conservative Robert Smart, came as the trust consults on plans to consolidate services at either the DGH or Conquest Hospital in Hastings.

Cllr Babarinde said: “Time after time, we are finding services are stripped out of our hospital. On the guillotine now are some of our specialist cardiology services.

“We need them because of the size of our town. Eastbourne is one of the fastest-growing towns in the south east. Our hospital therefore should be one of the fastest-growing, yet it seems like it is one of the fastest shrinking as far as the services that are available in our DGH.

“Eastbourne needs and deserves these services in full, because of the transport issues that will arise if these services are not available here and people have to travel to another hospital to access them.”

The motion also called on residents to take part in the ongoing consultation on the proposals, which is due to close on Friday, March 11. 

These arguments were backed by Cllr Smart, who said: “ESHT’s record on cardiology has been very, very good indeed and [senior consultant cardiologist] Professor Nik Patel and his colleagues deserve our credit and thanks for the work they have done in the past and we hope will continue to do in Eastbourne.

“If you were a betting man, you would assume it would not be removed from Eastbourne, but the fact of the matter is that there is a consultation and we would encourage all residents to participate.”

At the centre of the trust’s proposals are plans to consolidate its catheterisation laboratories — where angiograms, angioplasties and pacemaker operations are carried out — into a single location.

Currently these acute services are provided at both the DGH and the Conquest, although emergency angioplasties already alternate between one site or the other during evenings and weekends.

The trust is looking at closing one of the labs and moving the service completely to one hospital or the other, although it says it does not currently have a preference which one.

Other specialist cardiac services, which involve surgical procedures or investigations that may require an overnight or longer stay, would also move to the same site. The other hospital would retain acute outpatient and diagnostic cardiology services, however.

While the proposals would see the cath labs consolidated, it is also planned to create emergency Cardiac Response Teams at both hospitals. These would support patients on their arrival at A&E.

Alongside this, ESHT would also establish ‘hot clinics’ at both hospitals, providing rapid consultant-led cardiology assessments for patients.

According to the NHS, the proposals come for a number of reasons, including workforce difficulties due the specialised nature of the service.

The NHS also argues the proposals would improve the quality of the service, as the current setup is making it difficult to consistently hit national targets. A national NHS improvement programme had also recommended the services be consolidated in 2020.

While a cross-party motion, it was not unanimously backed by councillors.

For the most part this was because a number of borough councillors also sit on the East Sussex Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee (HOSC). These councillors abstained, as voting could predetermine their later decision-making. 

However, there was also some opposition from Conservative councillor Tony Freebody, who argued the motion was an attempt to turn the proposals into a ‘political football’.

He said: “At the end of the day, the outcome of the consultation should be what is best for the patient. Patient outcomes are more important than anything else. 

“These proposals have been developed by hospital doctors, GPs and other health professionals. They are the clinicians. 

“When you go to a consultant at the DGH … [or] your GP, you trust them. They are the clinicians to make those clinical judgements. That is what they are doing in this.”

He added: “I am not against this motion, but I am not for it either. I am afraid that once again — and I say this as someone who has worked in the NHS for the last 26 years — I feel this is yet more of the NHS being used as a political football. 

“At the end of the day it needs to be what is the best outcome for the patient, no matter where that is.”

Cllr Freebody, who abstained rather than voting against, also stressed that both hospitals would retain emergency cardiac treatment should the proposals go ahead.

These comments saw criticism from some other councillors, although the motion ultimately passed on a majority vote.

To find out more about the plans and to comment on the consultation got to: www.sussexhealthandcare.uk/get-involved/cardiology-ophthalmology-east-sussex