© Nick Ansell/PAAt least 6,000 patients at Colchester general hospital may have had their records falsified to meet treatment targets.
The scandal over cancer treatment at a leading hospital has widened after it emerged that its own officials now fear that at least 6,000 patients may have had their records falsified to meet treatment targets.
Investigations by the Observer into the crisis at Colchester general hospital have also established that inquiries into whether staff were bullied into changing records will include the questioning of the hospital's chief executive, Gordon Coutts.
It emerged last week that the hospital's cancer unit is being investigated by police after staff said they had been "pressured or bullied" into changing data relating to patients in order to meet targets for cancer treatment. The healthcare watchdog, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), said the records of 22 patients, out of a sample of 61 that were examined, had been altered to conceal the fact that they had faced "extensive" delays for treatment, which in some cases could have put their lives at risk.
Data was changed to make it appear that the hospital was meeting national cancer targets, which demand that patients wait no more than 62 days from urgent GP referral to completion of the first phase of treatment.
Initially it was reported that the records of the 22 patients appeared to have been changed and that 30 patients or next of kin had been written to, offering to review their treatment. However, sources close to the investigation now say that 6,000 or more patients referred to the Essex hospital between 2010 and 2013 may be caught up in the scandal.
It is believed that the hospital authorities are working on an assumption that a third of cases may be affected because the original sample showed around that proportion of patients' records had been tampered with. The hospital treats 6,000 cancer patients a year, equivalent to 18,000 over a three-year period.
The crisis surrounding cancer care in Colchester is adding to pressure already on ministers over the NHS as doctors and staff warn that the service is struggling to cope with growing demand from an ageing population and lack of adequate provision for care in the community.
The Observer understands that one patient's treatment at the Colchester hospital was delayed by more than 200 days. Monitor, the regulator for foundation trust hospitals, has placed the hospital in special measures, and Professor Sir Mike Richards, chief inspector of hospitals, has warned that lives may have been put at risk for the sake of waiting times figures.
When asked if instructions to change data came from Coutts's office, a hospital spokesman said: "This is subject to an independent investigation that has been commissioned."
Last week, North Essex MP Bernard Jenkin defended Coutts as an outstanding NHS manager. He told Radio 4's Today programme: "Actually, Gordon Coutts is, in my view, the best hospital chief executive - and I've been an MP for 20 years - I have ever come across in Colchester."
Two members of Coutts's executive team carried out a review of cancer services in February 2012 after concerns about bullying were first raised. Coutts has admitted that review was not adequate. He said: "It wasn't robust enough and it didn't go deep enough and that is regrettable."
One of the people questioned as part of the review was the then director of cancer services Mark Jarman-Howe, who became chief executive of St Helena Hospice in Colchester in April 2012.
CQC inspectors went to the Colchester Hospital University NHS Foundation Trust in August and September after it also received complaints about waiting times for cancer treatment.
It found that some patients did not get their treatment within the required 62-day limit, and in three cases the wait was longer than 100 days. "The provider did not have adequate system to maintain the safety and welfare of cancer patients," it said.
A Colchester general hospital spokesman said: "The national cancer waiting times standards are challenging targets but they are set for the best interests of patients, so if we cannot achieve them we need to learn why and change what we do - and to apologise to patients for failing to achieve them.
"That is why we are making changes, such as bringing in external experts to work alongside our own staff in the running of its cancer services to help implement improvements and ensure the highest standards are being achieved consistently."
Katherine Murphy, chief executive of the Patients' Association, a charity which campaigns on behalf of patients, said it was "terrible" that the pursuit of targets and statistics seemed to have taken precedence over patient care.
"The target-driven culture and the fact that senior people in charge of our patients are prepared to falsify patients is deeply worrying," she said. "There is a question of morality here. Dishonesty at this level is so serious and those responsible must be held to account."
The thing is, its not surprising. Companies (organisations) are psychopaths. I.e. they have no conscience and no empathy. They simply don't care. People continue to be surprised by their behaviour. Its a lot more common than "people" think.
I'm glad this is going through the legal process, but the hospital will defend it's "bestest" flunky.