Epilepsy (Hansard, 6 March 2003)

§ Baroness Gould of Potternewton
asked Her Majesty's Government:
What action they intend to take following the review of the management of patients with epilepsy by the University Hospitals of Leicester National Health Service Trust.

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Lord Hunt of Kings Heath)
My Lords, we have commissioned an independent review of this issue which is due to be published in the spring. We will consider its findings very carefully alongside the local clinical review to decide what further action may he needed.

§ Baroness Gould of Potternewton
My Lords, in asking my Question, I must declare an interest as president of Epilepsy Action. I welcome the fact that such a review is taking place. However, can my noble friend indicate whether, perhaps as a result of the review, the Department of Health will undertake further investigation into whether there is a prevalence of misdiagnosis in other hospitals? I make the point particularly because of the shortage of epilepsy-trained neurologists. I wonder what action is being taken and what resources are being provided to improve the situation.

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, I should like first to congratulate my noble friend on the 958 announcement today of her appointment as chair of the Advisory Group on Sexual Health and HIV. She is right to suggest that there are lessons to be learned nationally from what happened in Leicester. It is a. fact that there are problems in diagnosing epilepsy by doctors. We intend that the treatment and care of people with epilepsy will be part of the National Service Framework on Long-Term Conditions. My noble friend's point on diagnosis will indeed be covered in that national service framework.

§ Baroness Barker
My Lords, according to the CSAG report, epilepsy misdiagnosis in children Ina) occur in up to 40 per cent of cases in this country. In view of that, what steps will the Government take to require strategic health authorities to provide specialist epilepsy neurological services and training to other paediatric staff?

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, as I believe I have already mentioned, the National Service Framework on Long-Term Conditions will be extremely helpful in assisting the NHS to ensure that it has the right kind of services and deals with some of the diagnosis problems to which the noble Baroness referred. In the past two weeks, we have published an action plan on epilepsy which involves provision of support and information. We are also referring to NICE the question of drug treatment for epilepsy. On the workforce issue, we have had an increase in the number of consultants within the paediatric specialty and a small increase in the number of consultants within paediatric neurology. Within the specialist interest nursing profession, we are again seeing an increase in the number of epilepsy nurses. I recognise that more needs to be done, but I believe that we have set the framework in which to tackle these important issues.

§ Earl Howe
My Lords, I declare an interest as president of the National Society for Epilepsy. Is the Minister aware of the disappointment expressed by many bodies in the world of epilepsy care that the amount of money earmarked in the Government's action plan for the 380,000 people in this country who have epilepsy is a mere £1.2 million? How far does he believe that that sort of money will go among so many epilepsy patients?

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, the point about the specific funding announcement is that £1.2 million is for the non-NHS modernisation agency project, which will help to improve the quality and access to neurology services, and that £288,000 is going to the National Society for Epilepsy to improve information and support for people with epilepsy and their families. It is a relatively small amount of resource. However, we are moving away from the earmarking of funds nationally towards placing as much money as possible at the local level, and it will be for local primary care trusts to decide how to spend that money. I accept that in doing that we have a responsibility to ensure that there is enough guidance for primary care trusts so that they do indeed spend the 959 resources in this important area. That is the purpose of the action plan, the national service framework and the referral to NICE in relation to epilepsy drugs.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, will the noble Lord confirm that research into epilepsy, and indeed any other long-term illness, has nothing to do with primary care trusts? Can he say how much money the Government are spending on research in this particular area?

§ Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
My Lords, much of the research in this area will be funded through the Medical Research Council. The latest figures that I have are for 2000–01, when the MRC spent about £3 million in this area. However, the council also spends larger sums on basic research on nerve function and damage, and that should also be effective. In addition, one of our R&D programmes is sponsoring a project on a randomised control trial of longer-term clinical outcomes and the cost-effectiveness of standard and new anti-epileptic drugs. That is being funded at a cost of about £1.3 million.