Hospital Board Policy On Bed Usage Explained

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31081, 9 June 1966, Page 10

Hospital Board Policy On Bed Usage Explained

While there might be 70 or more empty beds at any one time, an average of 30 babies’ bassinets or cots were not suitable for adults, and 40 or so other empty beds meant an average of only three a ward, said the North Canterbury Hospital Board’s Medical Superintendent-in-Chief (Dr L. M. Berry), yesterday.

In a statement prepared at the request of the board’s chairman (Dr. L. C. L. Averill), Dr. Berry was replying to Miss M. B. Howard, M.P., who, in the House of Representatives on Tuesday night, asked the Minister of Health (Mr McKay) to find out why so many beds were empty in the Christchurch Hospital when people needed admittance.

Dr. Berry said that a Christchurch Hospital average of 85 per cent bed occupancy, or 380 beds, was considered good bed usage. Acute general hospitals could not refuse to admit an urgent case so with more than 85 per cent occupancy some departments would be short of beds to cope with the emergencies that occurred daily. “Further admissions over this level lead to over-crowd-ing,” Dr. Berry continued. “Those who remember the rows of beds down the middle of the big wards surely do not suggest a return to those days, with the consequent appearance of falling standards, and higher cross-infection rates, which cannot be accepted as good hospital practice.

“I am sorry Miss Howard has repeated in the House statements she made to the board. She refuses to give the details, but I have been able to investigate this case, and the facts given are not correct.

“At no time,” said Dr. Berry, “have emergency cases or cases in acute pain been refused a bed, and, contrary to another statement made in the House, up to 150 waitinglist cases are admitted weekly.”

Dr. Averill said that Miss Howard’s remarks were sincerely regretted by all who

had the future of the North Canterbury hospital service and the welfare of the Christchurch group of hospitals at heart. “It is a great pity that Miss Howard does not make more efficient use of her board membership by attending board meetings and taking a more active interest in the Christchurch hospitals rather than taking- matters on which she is singularly uninformed to the privileged sphere of the House,” Dr. Averill continued.

“In the term of the last board, 34 meetings were held, of which Miss Howard attended 13. On Miss Howard’s own statement, she has never visited the Princess Margaret Hospital, and does not intend to enter it voluntarily, though this hospital is one of the

three larger institutions administered by the board. “It appears that board membership is being used merely as an opportunity for personal publicity. Sick people should not become the chopping-block of party politics.” Dr. Averill also referred to a statement made in the House last week by Mr R. M. Macfarlane, M.P., who, he said, had blamed the Minister of Health and the department’s architectural division for delay in getting on with the new Christchurch Hospital block.

This was grossly unfair criticism, as the board’s works committee had had the utmost co-operation from the department, and, as Mr Macfarlane should know, planning was in an advanced stage, said Dr. Averill.