Tag Archives: HM Government

Doctors across Europe can now learn more about the importance of reporting suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) via a free e-learning module.

Prompt reporting helps make medicines safer and is part of a doctor’s responsibility. This includes informing patients and carers how they can help by reporting suspected side effects themselves.

Regulators like the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) rely on the reporting of suspected ADRs to make sure medicines on the market are acceptably safe. However, all reporting systems suffer from underreporting, and training healthcare professionals to report suspected ADRs is important to both raise awareness and help strengthen the system.

The e-learning module has now received the highest order of accreditation from the European Accreditation Council for CME (EACCME®). This means doctors are awarded 1 EACCME credit upon completion of the 45 minute ADR e-learning module.

The ADR e-learning module was created by the Strengthening Collaboration for Operating Pharmacovigilance in Europe (SCOPE) Joint Action project.

A survey conducted by SCOPE found many European countries lacked sustainable educational materials about ADR reporting. This e-learning aims to support healthcare professionals and medicines regulators by providing clear guidance which is rewarded with CME/CPD points.

Mick Foy, group manager for MHRA’s Vigilance and Risk Management of Medicines division said:

The key aim of our work is to make sure medicines are effective and acceptably safe. The reporting of suspected ADRs is vital in helping us achieve this aim.

Doctors are critical to this as their position on the front line of care means they are often the first to recognise an adverse drug reaction.

We’ve created this e-learning module help doctors so they can have confidence that their reports are making a difference.

All healthcare professionals, and indeed patients themselves, can help make medicines safer by reporting any suspected side effects easily and quickly through our Yellow Card Scheme online or via the mobile app. Other countries collect reports in similar methods.

Notes to Editor

1. The e-learning module is hosted on the SCOPE website. Learners are asked to complete a short survey upon completion of the e-learning.
2. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency is responsible for regulating all medicines and medical devices in the UK by ensuring they work and are acceptably safe. All our work is underpinned by robust and fact-based judgements to ensure that the benefits justify any risks. MHRA is a centre of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency which also includes the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control (NIBSC) and the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). MHRA is an executive agency of the Department of Health.
3. National reporting systems for the collection of suspected adverse drug reactions (commonly known as side effects) have acted as early warning systems to help identify numerous important safety issues, many of which were not recognised as being related to a particular medicine until reports were received by medicines regulators www.mhra.gov.uk/yellowcard
4. The SCOPE Joint Action project aims to support EU member states in the operation of their pharmacovigilance systems which help safeguard public health. It is funded through contributions from European Commission and the involved Member States.
5. The SCOPE Joint Action project social media campaign to raise awareness levels of national ADR reporting systems is being taken forward through the Heads of Medicines Agencies Working Group for Communications Professionals.
6. The European Union of Medical Specialists (Union Européenne des Médecins Spécialistes – UEMS) is a non-governmental organisation representing national associations of medical specialists in the European Union and in associated countries. Current membership includes 37 countries.

read more

When I was first made Health Secretary I said it was the biggest privilege of my life, and so it has proved. What I didn’t realise then was that it would also become my biggest passion – working in health is not just a job but a vocation.

The election period reinforced more acutely than ever the incredible work of the NHS, particularly the way staff dealt first with the global cyber-attack and then with horrendous terror attacks in Manchester and London.

After the Manchester bombing I met nurses caring for bereaved families with incredible compassion, whilst in London I heard stories of doctors who cycled the length of the city at 2am just because they wanted to help.

These stories speak to a wider truth: NHS staff do an amazing job, often in the most difficult of circumstances. And it is this which brings us all together – our great belief in the NHS, what it stands for and what we believe it can be.

Your compassion, energy, dynamism and total dedication, day in, day out, are truly humbling.

When I look at what the NHS has achieved in recent years, I think you can feel very proud. Despite the financial crash and ensuing period of constrained budgets, today’s NHS has some of its highest ever satisfaction ratings, carries out 5,000 more operations a day, has lower MRSA rates than France, Germany or Spain, and sees its highest ever survival rates for cancer, heart attacks and stroke.

One of the biggest expansions of mental health provision in Europe is underway right here, and there’s been a transformation in attitudes towards patient safety in the wake of Mid-Staffs. These achievements simply wouldn’t have been possible without you, our world-class doctors, nurses, paramedics and everyone else who works every day, across the country, to make the NHS the best it can be.

I am proud that this country was the first to say that no one – rich or poor, young or old – should have to worry about affording good healthcare. Indeed we have made this pledge central to how people right across the world define a civilised nation.

Going forwards, we must continue to focus not just on equity but also on excellence. We need to continue our work on patient safety, continue the transformation of mental health, continue developing new models of care and continue to put as much energy into prevention as into cure.

That’s my mission – to support the NHS to become the safest, highest quality health system in the world.

This is not to ignore the fact that difficult issues lie ahead. Money is always going to be a pressure, for instance. But I am confident that, working together, we can unite the whole NHS to deliver the safest, highest quality care anywhere in the world.

I would like to take the opportunity to thank you all for your hard work to make this vision a reality.

read more

The five-month Brathay Apprentice Challenge saw them compete against teams from the country’s leading apprentice employers and training providers. The GSK apprentices battled off tough competition from seven other national finalist teams after proving their logistical, team building and communications skills.

As part of the challenge the team also delivered a community project, which involved creating a series of four short films about the dangers of asthma attacks. The films were made in memory of a little boy, Joshua West who had a fatal asthma attack. The team went on to show the films in schools and sports clubs.

The Brathay Apprentice Challenge, the search for the apprentice team of the year is supported by the National Apprenticeship Service. In 2017, teams reached over 70,000 young people to raise awareness of the benefits of apprenticeships and recruited over 500 new employers interested in offering apprenticeships.

GSK narrowly beat Nottingham City Homes into second place and JCB who finished third. Teams from Derwent Training Association, IBM, Redrow Homes, Severn Trent Water and WSP also competed in the national finals.

The total of eight National Finalists were selected from 75 teams and 650 apprentices who entered the Challenge. Since January, the teams have worked hard to spread the word about apprenticeships and have visited more than 555 schools, careers fairs and youth groups to encourage young people to consider an apprenticeship. The apprentice teams have also reached out to their local communities and delivered 44 community projects to benefit young people.

Team member and engineering apprentice, Joseph Hambley said on winning the challenge:

“I am happy for me, happy for my team and happy for my employer. It is a great honour for all of us to have won the title apprentice team of the year and have our hard work recognised.”

Phil Wilson, Site Director at GSK Ulverston, congratulated their apprentices and said:

“What an amazing achievement. I am so very proud of the full team. We have watched them be stretched and grow throughout the challenge.

The highlight was seeing them develop from being all about the challenge and winning it to being about making a major contribution to the community in raising awareness of asthma and helping save lives. This is a great recognition of the Joshua West legacy.”

Sue Husband, Director of the National Apprenticeship Service, said:

“Congratulations to GSK on being crowned the 2017 apprentice team of the year and to all of the teams that have taken part in this year’s challenge. Together they have shown the genuine difference an apprenticeship can make.

The new skills and the new experiences these apprentices have gained in the challenge will add to the opportunity apprenticeships provide to earn while you learn, as well as helping the employer grow and increase its productivity.

The hard work the teams have put into the challenge has made real differences to their communities, the next generation of young people thinking about their careers and encouraged more employers to take on apprentices.

They are great ambassadors for apprenticeships.”

read more

The Charity Commission has concluded that the trustees of The Catalyst Trust were responsible for misconduct and mismanagement in the administration of the charity. The Commission has permanently removed the trustee primarily responsible for the charity’s management and administration (the ‘dominant trustee’) which permanently prevents this individual from acting as a trustee in the management of any other charity.

The charity had general charitable purposes, with its activities described as the provision of project management and advice, loans, grants and guarantees to charities. In 2013 the Commission received a complaint from a member of the public, which raised concerns about the rental payments of a property owned by the charity.

The Commission carried out a books and records inspection of the charity in February 2014 and found unexplained transactions totalling more than £60,000. This raised concerns about the accuracy of the accounts because the charity had never declared an income of more than £25,000 in its annual return. The Commission escalated the case to an Inquiry on 10 June 2014 to examine its serious concerns regarding the financial management of the charity.

The Inquiry found that in practice the ‘dominant trustee’ was operating the charity and making decisions on its behalf, with minimal input from the other trustees. The inquiry established that out of an income of approximately £71,000 between 2009 and 2013 only £2,217 was described by the trustees as direct charitable expenditure. However, the inquiry established that £2,050 of this amount was paid to a private company to develop a software project.

The Commission found that this software project was not charitable and was a misapplication of charitable funds. The inquiry found that investments and loans had been made by the charity to companies in which the ‘dominant trustee’ had a personal interest or connection. It was clear to the Commission that potential conflicts of interests had not been identified or adequately managed by the trustees.

The Commission concluded that there had been misconduct and mismanagement in the administration of the charity as there was evidence of both poor governance and poor financial management. The Inquiry found that the charity was not being operated in furtherance of its charitable objectives, the trustees had failed to manage conflicts of interest and had failed to comply with their legal duty as trustees.

Following the Commission’s decision to remove the ‘dominant trustee’, whose continual presence in the charity put the charity’s assets at serious risk and whose actions had resulted in serious losses to the charity the trustees decided to close the charity and apply the reminder of its funds to a charity with similar purposes. The charity was therefore removed from the register on 10 November 2016.

Harvey Grenville, Head of Investigations and Enforcement, said:

This inquiry was hindered by the failure of the ‘dominant trustee’ to fully cooperate with the Commission. Despite this attempt to frustrate our investigation we have been able to take strong action and remove this individual to protect charities from abuse.

Trustees must act collectively together and avoid one individual taking sole, or inappropriate control of a charity. In this case the trustees did not manage or identify conflicts of interests and allowed improper loans and investments to be made by one individual.

All trustees have a duty to make decisions which are reasonable and in the best interests of their charity. They must only spend funds on activities which are in furtherance of a charity’s purposes. Trustee duties are detailed in our guidance ‘The Essential Trustee’.

The full report is available on GOV.UK.

Ends

PR 47/17

---

Notes to editors

1. The Charity Commission is the independent regulator of charities in England and Wales. To find out more about our work, see our annual report.
2. Search for charities on our online register.
3. Section 46 of the Charities Act 2011 gives the Commission the power to institute inquiries.

read more

Entrepreneurs, innovators and investors are invited to a free one-day networking event to promote UK business innovation and growth.

read more