AMBULANCE services in Hampshire have been rated as one of the worst in the country by an independent regulator - news which is said to have ÒdevastatedÓ workers.

But ambulance bosses insist that this is Òa year of improvementÓ and that dramatic enhancements are being made.

On Wednesday, the Department of Health released the findings of a nationwide 2002/3 review carried out by the Commission for Health Improvement (CHI) - the independent regulator of NHS performance.

The government set the priorities, key targets and indicators used in ratings and the CHI looks at how well it performs and awards up to three stars to individual trusts for its performance.

However Hampshire Ambulance Trust has been awarded the worst possible grading with no stars at all, primarily because it failed to meet all response time targets. Last year it was awarded one star.

The trust failed to ensure that ambulances responded to 75 per cent of life-threatening calls within eight minutes, the majority of other urgent ambulance calls within 19 minutes and urgent GP calls within 15 minutes.

It also fell down on staff working conditions, thrombolysis care and protecting patients against the risk of clinical negligence.

A statement from Hampshire Ambulance expressed its disappointment at the ratings but said that change was on the horizon - especially with new acting chief executive Claire Severgnini in the driving seat following the sacking of her predecessor, Richard Mawson, in May.

It said that the service was Òmaking significant strides towards improving overall quality and performance.

ÒA new acting chief executive is in place to drive the service forward. This includes strengthening clinical leadership and management as well as building closer working relationships with local NHS and communities.

ÒThe trustÕs staff are also working extremely hard to improve frontline services to patients.

ÒAt the start of this year, between April and June, the trust has achieved the national standard to respond to 75 per cent of category A, life threatening, calls within eight minutes which is excellent news for local people.

ÒRecently, under the guidance of the newly appointed medical director, protocols have been introduced that allow ambulance crews to provide new treatments to patients at the scene and increase their chance of survival.

ÒOther initiatives also included issuing new cardiac life-saving equipment to all emergency response vehicles. We also have several initiatives being put into place to improve working conditions and general environment for all ambulance staff, including the improving working lives initiative, education training and development programmes.

ÒIt is clear that 2003/4 will be a year of improvement. The trust is looking forward to continuing its drive for improved services for patients and improved working lives for staff, which will lead to a better star rating next year.Ó

Ambulance staff are bitterly disappointed at the news and union representatives have said that rural cover is being hit the most.

Chairman of the Joint Shop StewardsÕ Committee Jim Barnett said: ÒThe result is not unexpected but it is nonetheless pretty devastating, especially for those of us working hard out in the field.Ó

In another devastating blow to local heath services one of the three acute hospitals serving Bordon residents also received no stars.

Last year the Royal Surrey County Hospital was given a two-star rating but this year it has been given the lowest rating tbecause of long waiting times at its accident and emergency department.

Financial management was also criticised but this is largely due to the fact that the trust inherited a huge amount of debt from the now disbanded West Surrey Health Authority.

Chief executive Matthew Swindells said: ÒThis is an excellent hospital and although we accept the star system, we need to examine why we scored so badly.

ÒPart of that problem is that the way A&E is calculated has changed. Our local residents know that we have always had problems with long waits, although we have improved dramatically here, but the star rating has caught up with this issue and the way they calculate the scores has hit us hard. Effectively we have improved things for patients but lost marks.Ó

Frimley Park slipped from three stars to two stars, due to the inherited financial deficiency, but chief executive Andrew Morris said that staff Òcan be very proud of their achievementÓ.

But there was excellent news at North Hampshire Hospital Trust which got top marks and a three star rating, an increase from its two stars last year.

The hospitalÕs patient surveys and waiting times at accident and emergency were particularly good as well as finances and cleanliness.

Chief executive Mary Edwards said: ÒThis is fantastic news and is a tribute to the hard work and commitment of all our staff.

ÒHowever, while it is right that we should celebrate this news, the trust will not be complacent as we recognise that there are areas where we can, and should, improve our services.Ó

Also celebrating is the North Hampshire Primary Care Trust which was awarded two stars in its first year of being assessed.

The trust, which is responsible for community and primary care services including those run at the Chase Community Hospital, got above average scoring on patient surveys and improving conditions for staff.

PCT chairman Tony Ludlow said: ÒI am delighted that the efforts of the whole team have been recognised because the performance of the NHS depends crucially on its staff.

ÒThis awarding of two stars will be very good for staff morale.Ó