Hutt Valley Hospital

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 158, 1 April 1937, Page 13

Hutt Valley Hospital

Sir, —In the latest Government publication on the statistics of New Zealand hospitals, 1937, we read that 63.9 people per 1090 of population were treated as in-patients of our public hospitals and 81.9 people per l(M)0 were treated as outpatients. If we take the population of the Hutt Valley aa approximately 35,060 then this gives approximately 2236 inpatients and 2566.9 out-patients. The Wellington figures of out-patients and the number of treatments average a little under seven visits per out-patient, so approximately these 2236 out-patients would make 20,063 visits to Wellington at the lowest cost of 2/ per trip. This applies also to cost of friends visiting their sick relatives in the Wellington Hospital, and the average stay of each patient in Wellington Hospital is 21.1 days. So one can work out the approximate cost of travelling to the Hutt Valley people which would be saved by the establishment of a Hutt Valley hospital. Taking the cost of treatment of inpatients at the Wellington Hospital, we find that they have the highest cost per patient of £11.2 for any hospital of oter a daily occupied bed of 200 and upword. The average cost for this group of hospitals is £9.8 per in-patient treated. The average for the group 40 to 100 daily occupied beds is £10.3, and for 20 to 40 daily occupied beds £9.4. So these figures go to support decentralisation, or rather the smaller type of hospital, as the more economical type of hospital. Wellington has the highest amount of authorised loans of any hospital board in New Zealand —£273,945. On March 31,1936, the actual amount was £266,232, and this exceeds any other board’s liabilities by £89,167. So Wellington Hospital is the most indebted hospital in New Zealand. Another advantage of smaller hospitals is that the cost of supervision is much less. The cost of hospitals based on beds is smaller. A large centralised hospital averages between £l2OO and £2OOO per bed, while a smaller hospital can easily be provided at £5OO per bed. If the new hospital is to cost even £500,000, and this does not include additions to the nurses’ home and boiler-house which brings the loan proposed up to £700,000, how can the Hutt Valley people hope to get their hospital inside another 20 years at the least? It means a total indebtedness of £1,000,000 or more, and the working costs will also be increased permanently by the cost of upkeep of another 250 beds. This increased cost

alone will, with the loan charges, nearly double the present hospital rate. Grant Wellington another 250 beds and how can the Hutt people get another turn of the rate screw to run their 170-bed hospital on top of the suggested increases? The position would be hopeless for the Hutt people because the rates would be up so high that no one would dare ask the ratepayers for a loan for the Hutt Valley Hospital. Nowhere do we find annual rates falling. The tendency will be for local bodies to increase the rates to avoid borrowing for new work. Enough has been spent in Wellington for the present.—l am, etc., QED Wellington, March 30.