CRITICISM OF HOSPITALS

Taranaki Daily News, 10 June 1932, Page 9

CRITICISM OF HOSPITALS

DIRECTOR-GENERAL REPLIES

VOLUNTARY HOSPITALS’ FAILURE

“NOT OVER-SUPPLIED WITH BEDS.”

WARNING AGAINST COMPLACENCY

By Telegraph.—Press Association.

Wellington, June 9. “From time to time loose criticisms are levelled against the New Zealand hospital system,” said the DirectorGeneral of Health (Dr. M. H. Watt) at a conference of the Hospital Boards’ Association to-day. “The most criticisms are that we have made a serious mistake in departing from the traditional British method of providing treatment in voluntary as opposed to official hospitals, that we have too many beds relative to the size of the population, that the average stay is too great, and generally that the cost of treatment is too high.” These criticisms, said Dr. Watt, were hard to refute on account of the difficulty of obtaining authentic information about the hospitals of other countries, but a survey had been made of the available hospital reports and relevant literature, and his task of placing before the conference the facts he had been able to glean from these was made easier by a series of reports by Sir Arthur Newshelme.

The first point brought out by a perusal of Sir Arthur’s studies was that voluntary hospitals had nowhere proved equal to the demands and had to be supplemented by State or municipal institutions.- It was obvious that this type of institution was sadly handicapped by its lack of assured income. Dr. Watt quoted the post-war experience of London an-d English hospitals, and the breakdown of finance in connection with the Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, where 200 beds were closed last year and admission was refused to all but urgent and accidental cases. NEW ZEALAND COMPARED. The second point Dr. Watt set out was that New Zealand was not oversupplied with beds. The figures per thousand of population were: New Zealand 5.98, England and Wales 5.88, Scotland 5.75, Denmark 6.75, Norway 5.52, Sweden 5.09. These countries were selected because the standard of living approximated most closely that of the Dominion.

On the third point Er. Watt quoted an array of figures showing that the average stay in hospital also compared favourably, but he added that it did not follow that the average length of stay was incapable of reduction. With regard to the cost per bed, Dr. Watt quoted New. Zealand as £200.3, London hospitals with medical schools £215.8, London hospitals without medical schools £161.2, Canada £206.8, Victoria £210,9.

“Although no doubt we can derive a measure of satisfaction from 1 a comparative statement of this sort,” Dr. Watt said, “we must not adopt a complacent attitude. We must recognise that New Zealand’s present financial problems are of a peculiar complexity and magnitude, and for that reason we must not relax our endeavours to effect improvements and economies wherever possible, especially where that can be done without unduly impairing the efficiency of our hospital machine.”