The government recently released detailed figures on the daily admissions into hospital NHS trusts for Covid. Previously only the government had this information, people more generally could not get it.
The importance of this is that it becomes possible to check whether the government's figures for infection area by area are accurate or not. Obvoiusly there is not a one to one relationship between local authorities, MSOAs and NHS trusts. Sometimes people go to a different hospital to their local one, but normally they go to the local one. Hence we can do a broad brush test for accuracy.
I have picked London because the government are claiming a uniformly high level of infection across the city. The evidence from hospital admissions is that there is infection, but many hospitals have not actually had much of a second wave (click on Guys below to see an example) and the remaining infection growth is in a limited number of trusts.
The table looks at growth from the peak in April in the last available week in December (ending 15th Dec) and also looks at the growth from the November average. It highlights that some areas have either a small second wave or almost no second wave.
Last Week ave is the average number of hospital admissions in that trust in the last available week. "Nov Ave" is the average number of admissions in November. 23/3-5/4 Ave is the average number of admissions during the peak period. If the average in the last week is more than the average in November the table says "growing". If the average in the last week is over 50% of the average in the March/April peak the table says "second wave". The detailed figures are available for each trust on the government website here: Figures for Barking
The lesson for government from this is that decisions should be taken based upon hospital data not on PCR testing (which is not giving reliable results).
Methodology: I have picked the list of acute trusts from here I have tried to balance back to the statistics from the government web site. I think I have missed out one or two smaller institutions that are treated by the government as being in the stats. The figures for 15th December balance completely, but overall there are some small variations under 1%. If someone can tell me what is missing then I will add it.
The importance of this is that it becomes possible to check whether the government's figures for infection area by area are accurate or not. Obvoiusly there is not a one to one relationship between local authorities, MSOAs and NHS trusts. Sometimes people go to a different hospital to their local one, but normally they go to the local one. Hence we can do a broad brush test for accuracy.
I have picked London because the government are claiming a uniformly high level of infection across the city. The evidence from hospital admissions is that there is infection, but many hospitals have not actually had much of a second wave (click on Guys below to see an example) and the remaining infection growth is in a limited number of trusts.
The table looks at growth from the peak in April in the last available week in December (ending 15th Dec) and also looks at the growth from the November average. It highlights that some areas have either a small second wave or almost no second wave.
Last Week ave is the average number of hospital admissions in that trust in the last available week. "Nov Ave" is the average number of admissions in November. 23/3-5/4 Ave is the average number of admissions during the peak period. If the average in the last week is more than the average in November the table says "growing". If the average in the last week is over 50% of the average in the March/April peak the table says "second wave". The detailed figures are available for each trust on the government website here: Figures for Barking
The lesson for government from this is that decisions should be taken based upon hospital data not on PCR testing (which is not giving reliable results).
| Grow cf Nov | Grow cf April | Last Week ave | Nov Ave | 23/3-5/4 ave | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barking Havering and Redbridge | second wave | growing | 80% | 34% | 30.43 | 16.93 | 22.64 |
| Barts | second wave | growing | 158% | -42% | 46.57 | 18.03 | 80.00 |
| Central and NW London | small or no second wave | growing | 22% | -95% | 0.29 | 0.23 | 5.43 |
| Central London CHC | second wave | growing | 191% | 143% | 2.43 | 0.83 | 1.00 |
| Chelsea and Westminster | small or no second wave | growing | 82% | -71% | 13.00 | 7.13 | 45.29 |
| Croydon | small or no second wave | growing | 44% | -56% | 10.57 | 7.37 | 24.07 |
| Epsom and St Helier | second wave | growing | 89% | -18% | 15.14 | 8.00 | 18.57 |
| Great Ormond St | small or no second wave | shrinking | -39% | -83% | 0.29 | 0.47 | 1.71 |
| Guys and St Thomas | small or no second wave | shrinking | -14% | -97% | 1.57 | 1.83 | 50.57 |
| East London NHS FT | second wave | growing | 376% | 5% | 2.86 | 0.60 | 2.71 |
| Homerton | small or no second wave | growing | 135% | -53% | 7.43 | 3.17 | 15.79 |
| Imperial College | small or no second wave | growing | 66% | -76% | 11.29 | 6.80 | 47.29 |
| Kings College | small or no second wave | shrinking | -40% | -95% | 3.57 | 6.00 | 66.00 |
| Kingston | second wave | growing | 48% | -35% | 9.00 | 6.07 | 13.79 |
| Lewisham and Greenwich | second wave | growing | 185% | 48% | 21.29 | 7.47 | 14.43 |
| London North West | small or no second wave | growing | 64% | -79% | 21.43 | 13.10 | 104.14 |
| Moorfield | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Nightingale London | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| North East London | second wave | growing | 74% | 256% | 4.57 | 2.63 | 1.29 |
| NE London Treatment Centre | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| North Middlesex University Hospital | small or no second wave | growing 156% | -68% | 10.43 | 4.07 | 33.07 | |
| Oxleas | #DIV/0! | shrinking | -87% | #DIV/0! | 0.14 | 1.13 | 0.00 |
| Royal Brompton | small or no second wave | shrinking | -20% | -92% | 0.43 | 0.53 | 5.07 |
| Royal free London | small or no second wave | growing | 58% | -66% | 11.71 | 7.43 | 34.07 |
| Royal National Orthopaedic | small or no second wave | shrinking | -100% | -100% | 0.00 | 0.13 | 0.71 |
| St Georges | small or no second wave | growing | 170% | -67% | 16.00 | 5.93 | 47.79 |
| SW London and St Georges | second wave | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | 967% | 2.29 | 0.00 | 0.21 |
| Spire London East | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| South London and Maudsley | small or no second wave | growing | 757% | -70% | 1.14 | 0.13 | 3.79 |
| The Hillingdon | second wave | growing | 78% | 129% | 12.43 | 6.97 | 5.43 |
| The Royal Marsden | small or no second wave | growing | 17% | -65% | 0.43 | 0.37 | 1.21 |
| University College London | second wave | growing | 98% | -22% | 6.29 | 3.17 | 8.07 |
| West London NHS Trust | second wave | growing | 109% | 67% | 2.86 | 1.37 | 1.71 |
| Whittington | small or no second wave | growing | 114% | -64% | 5.29 | 2.47 | 14.57 |
Methodology: I have picked the list of acute trusts from here I have tried to balance back to the statistics from the government web site. I think I have missed out one or two smaller institutions that are treated by the government as being in the stats. The figures for 15th December balance completely, but overall there are some small variations under 1%. If someone can tell me what is missing then I will add it.
Comments