Cancer patients at the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital could be forced to travel more than 60 miles for treatment under proposals put forward in a regional review of services.
North Shropshire residents using the local facility would be referred to the University Hospital of North Staffordshire in Stoke-on-Trent under new plans for gynaecological cancer sufferers.
The recommendation has been made in the Lind Report which was carried out by the Greater Midlands Cancer Network to review cancer services across the West Midlands. It is part of a national drive to improve cancer outcomes.
The gynaecological service at Shrewsbury is currently led by a single consultant, which is said to be not an efficient use of resources.
The 26-page report states “Serious concerns were raised about the progress in implementing the improving outcomes guidance (IOG) for gynaecological cancer with particular reference to cases performed at the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital which should be referred.
“It is not viable long-term. The ability of a single-handed consultant, however dedicated, to deliver this service long-term is highly doubtful.
“This must be regarded as a highly fragile service and action must be taken to secure gynaecological cancer services in a robust fashion for the population served by the Shrewsbury and Telford NHS Trust.”
Tricia Lowe, director of the Greater Midlands Cancer Network, said: “The review has recommended that a small number of patients who require specialist gynaecological cancer surgical procedures are transferred to an IOG compliant centre for the operation.
“The plans to implement the review’s recommendations will be presented to the relevant health overview and scrutiny committees.”
Paul Tulley, director of commissioning at Shropshire County PCT, said: “The most important factor in developing specialist cancer services, like treating gynecological cancer, is that patients have access to the best possible treatment at the right time.”
Paula Nash, clinical negligence specialist at Lanyon Bowdler, said: “I see all too frequently the impact of a missed or delayed diagnosis on patients and their families. I think there needs to be a public debate before these decisions are taken.”
By David Seadon