A damning verdict of Healthcare Improvement Scotland’s (HIS) handling of a Ninewells Hospital inspection has been delivered by health secretary Alex Neil.
He told MSPs he was “not impressed” by the way the body had dealt with its report into older people’s services at the Dundee hospital where a draft inspection report was shelved before being replaced by a document amalgamating in a second unannounced visit.
Mr Neil also called for NHS Tayside’s responses to the original document including an error report and clinicians’ letter to be brought into the public domain.
The Courier was the first to reveal details of the shelved inspection, where patients were described as being left on trolleys and wheelchairs in corridors of ward 15.
The original report said there were 35 people in such a situation waiting to be treated. That number was factually disputed by NHS Tayside and dropped from the final publication.
Mr Neil initially tried to distance himself from having any influence over HIS but, when pressed by opposition members, he revealed his dissatisfaction with the independent body.
The health secretary also said members of staff or directors of health boards that could be inspected would not be allowed to be appointed to HIS in future to prevent any “perceived conflict of interest”, a situation which he said “must never” arise.
He confirmed Perthshire South and Kinross-shire MSP Roseanna Cunningham and one other unnamed individual had contacted him to raise concerns about the investigation.
“There was clearly a dispute between the inspectors’ view of matters and Tayside NHS Board’s view of matters,” said Mr Neil.
“Normally, that would have been resolved by the senior management of HIS accepting or rejecting the errors and publishing the report.
“It did not do so in this case, and I have made it abundantly clear to the chair of HIS that I am not impressed by the way in which the matter has been handled, and that I expect it to ensure that any issues that arise from the way in which the Ninewells report has been handled are rectified timeously.”
He added: “My view, as I have made clear to HIS, is that if that report is in the public domain, for the sake of balance it would be only fair for the letter from the clinicians at Tayside NHS Board and the error report to be in the public domain as well, so that people can get a balanced view of why that report was not published when, normally, it would have been.”
Despite several attempts by The Courier to contact HIS Scotland, no one responded to our request for a response to Mr Neil’s call.
A spokeswoman for NHS Tayside said the release of any evidence relating to the unpublished report was a matter for HIS.