Table 5.
The tensions of the Nimble Approach. | |
I don’t think it [programme management] was nimble at all. [Laughter] …it’s very clunky because it’s actually run from a huge bureaucracy…. It’s not run anywhere local, there’s no nimble about it. | PR1 P19 |
It seemed like a long time; it could have been 3 weeks I’m not sure, to FINALLY get that document approved, and to FINALLY be able to circulate it. And in the end, it was never really broadly circulated, it sounds like, to those you know, to all levels of people involved in cancer care and screening. So it’s very unfortunate. And it was, I think by now it got to the appropriate recipients and it’s had its effect but it could have had even more impact if we, if a communication strategy had been ironed out. | PR4 P3 |
I mean, the overwhelming one [challenge] is the inability for the health boards to provide colonoscopy. That’s, that’s it really. The, the actual central laboratory runs really well, we don’t have any problems with it. The, the turnover is very fast and the quality control checks have all been very good. So, it’s not, it’s not an issue with the actual screening centre, it’s all-around colonoscopy capacity. And one of the challenges … is the variability between the different health boards in terms of colonoscopy waiting times. And that is something that, I suspect will be exaggerated in the coming months. | PR2 P12 |