Kate O'Connell (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for coming in today. I am sorry for leaving but I had to be in two committees at the same time. I am not sure if I am done with hearts or water at this stage. When I came in somebody was answering a question on the effective catchment area so I will not go over it again, but in any other assessment in which any of the witnesses have been involved throughout their professional careers have they used the effective catchment area metric? That is my first question.

The witnesses may not have Professor Herity's report in front of them but on page 20 he outlines the census figures and then the effective catchment figure. The 2016 figure indicates that 582,440 people live in the area. I would assume that that involves all people. I am not being smart but there is an age when heart attacks generally tend to occur. I assume that if this is a census figure it includes children. One could not argue, although I could be wrong and the witnesses are experts on this, that we should not be including a group of the population in this that will never want to access to catheterisation laboratory facilities. I respect the witnesses' views on effective catchment but in terms of these figures, I assume that children are not suited to be treated in their facilities and that they go to a children's hospital or wherever. This data, therefore, is not the right data either because it is looking at everybody in the area, including people who are highly unlikely to require the services. I contest that using the total population data is flawed also.

The witnesses explained very well the need for the second laboratory if one breaks down or somebody is admitted in the middle of that or whatever but I refer to the wider argument of the hospital group idea, and it is still just an idea.

If we had two catheterisation laboratories in Waterford or one laboratory with six or seven consultants operating 24-7, with Cork operating as the centre of excellence, would it be okay to have this level of cardiac care within one hospital group? The legislation does not provide that the current configuration of the hospital groups will remain in place. While I may be wrong, the proposal has the potential to be a move towards having two cardiac centres of excellence in a region covered by one hospital group. Is that the direction in which we are moving? Is what the witnesses are asking for okay or is it part of a wider plan to expand cardiac services in University Hospital Waterford, which may result in two cardiac centres of excellence being provided in one hospital group? Obviously, all the witnesses are interested in saving lives.

The latest information is that 150 patients per day is definitely the new minimum standard. Do the witnesses have a graph indicating times spent in an ambulance versus outcomes, in other words, the amount of cardiac damage done when patients do not reach the right location on time? If so, will they arrange to have this information circulated to members? While I accept that there are other factors involved, what impact do travel times have on patient outcomes?