Agenda item

(To receive a report from the Lincolnshire Integrated Care System (ICS), which provides the Committee with an update on the cancer programme and the Lincolnshire living with cancer programme.  Clair Raybould, Director for System Delivery, Lincolnshire Integrated Care Board (ICB) Sarah-Jane Gray, Deputy Cancer Programme Manager, Lincolnshire ICB, Kathie McPeake, Macmillan Living with Cancer Programme Manager, Lincolnshire ICB, and Colin Farquharson, Medical Director (ICS Senior Responsible Officer for Cancer – ULHT will be in attendance for this item)) 

The Committee considered a report from the Lincolnshire Integrated Care System (ICS), which provided an update on the Cancer Programme and the Lincolnshire Living with Cancer Programme.

The Chairman invited the following presenters, to remotely present the item to the Committee: Clair Raybould, Director for System Delivery, Lincolnshire Integrated Care Board (ICB); Sarah-Jane Gray, Deputy Cancer Programme Manager, Lincolnshire ICB, and Kathie McPeake, McMillan Living with Cancer Programme Manager.

The presentation referred to:

·       System performance;

·       Benchmarking information;

·       Cancer Alliance support in Lincolnshire;

·       Governance Structure for the ICB;

·       Challenges and Opportunities for the cancer programme; Improvements made by – Northern Lincolnshire and Goole NHS Foundation Trust (NLAG), North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust (NWFT) and United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust (ULHT) in the cancer care programme;

·       Future work;

·       An overview of the Lincolnshire Living with Cancer programme; and

·       A short video of the Cancer Summit 2022.

During consideration of this item, the Committee made some of the following comments:

·       There was recognition that action was being taken to enhance cancer care in Lincolnshire, but some disappointment was expressed to Lincolnshire’s poor benchmarking performance in only achieving 55.0% against the measure for 62 day urgent GP referral to treatment.  Some concern was expressed that the management of cancer care seemed to be spread across too many parties with no-one taking overall control.  The Committee was advised that one of the biggest concerns was resources, and that recent recruitment drives had been more successful.  It was highlighted over the last three/four weeks there had been a wider system approach which had produced better results.  It was highlighted that 90% of patients on a cancer pathway did not always have cancer, and as a result significant numbers of patients came off the cancer care pathway.  There was recognition that the situation was a difficult one, but reassurance was given that significant improvements were being made not just locally, but nationally as well.  A request was made by one member for a further report in six months’ time to show the improvements being made;

·       Some concern was expressed that patients were unable to get appointments with GPs, and that when they did, some GPs were reluctant to perform some tests, for example, the test for prostate cancer.  The Committee was advised that there was no evidence to suggest that patients were unable to get to see their GP; and that the PSA (Prostate-Specific Antigen) test would not be undertaken unless the patient had symptoms.  Some Committee members stressed that GP access was a massive issue and one that their electorate continually raised with them.  It was felt that access to GPs/primary care was a fundamental step in improving the process;

·       Robotic surgery and whether there were plans to extend the capacity.  It was reported that robotic surgery had been a success and that there was no reason that the provision would not be expanded further in the future;

·        A request was made for the return of mobile breast screening unit in the south of the county;

·       Cancer pathways with NWAFT.  Reassurance was given that there was good relationship with NWAFT, as with all other trusts, to ensure the holistic needs of patients were met;

·       What NWAFT and NLAG were doing differently, as the report detailed both were doing better with the targets: patients waiting over 104 days and patients waiting over 62 days;

·       The need for more information to show the outcomes of the improvements being carried out.  It was reported that some data was three years out of date.  The Committee was advised that staff worked hard to deliver the best service they could in the current circumstances;

·       The likelihood of funding to secure the seven roles to support the Living with Cancer Programme; and if funding was not secured what impact would this have on the programme going forward.  It was reported that it was thought that funding would not be an issue, however, it was highlighted that the funding bid would have to go through governance processes; and

·       A request was made to see if there was any data on how differences in waiting times translated into survival rates.  It was noted that this would be dependent of the type of cancer.  The Committee noted further that patients having to wait were monitored closely; and that if an aggressive cancer was diagnosed, each hospital trust would determine if the patient should be prioritised on the waiting list.

The Chairman on behalf on the Committee extended his thanks to the presenters.

RESOLVED

1.      That the Committee extended its thanks to all NHS staff working in cancer care.

2.      That the information presented on the Cancer Care Programme and the Lincolnshire Cancer Programme, including the improvements in the three acute hospital trusts and the importance of the Living with Cancer Programme be noted

3.      That a further update be received by the Committee in six months’ time.