IT’S a monthly ritual, the running commentary on the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital emergency department “performance” (“Waiting times at super hospital improve”, Herald, January 11). I hope nobody working in the emergency department gives it a second thought.

Back in 1970 when, courtesy of the Universities of Glasgow and Strathclyde Air Squadron, I was learning to land a Chipmunk at Glasgow Airport, the tower said to me: “Quebec 54, clear to land, taxi left immediately, expedite.” I dutifully acknowledged. My instructor said: “Quite right. Say ‘Roger, wilco’, then don’t change a thing. Taxi the aircraft exactly as you’ve been taught.”

I would say exactly the same thing to any emergency department junior doctor being instructed by the control tower of managers and politicians to “expedite” patients through the department within four hours. Politely acknowledge, and then practise medicine exactly as you’ve been taught.

It will not have escaped the notice of the said control tower that, south of the Border, Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt has started to abolish the four-hour rule. It’s a safe prediction that the same thing will shortly happen here in Scotland, thank goodness.

Mr Hunt wants to educate the public about the “appropriate” use of hospital emergency departments. In this regard, I would propose a very simple measure. Stop using the expression “Accident & Emergency (A & E)”. The correct terminology is “emergency department (ED)”. If a patient suffers an “accident”, say a sprained ankle, then he may say, why shouldn’t I go to A&E? That, after all, is what it says on the tin. Besides, any traumatologist will tell you there is no such thing as an accident. The emergency medicine community in Australia and New Zealand understood this 30 years ago and banned the word “accident”. I write respectfully to ask The Herald to do likewise.

Tell the control tower.

Dr Hamish Maclaren,

1 Grays Loan, Thornhill, Stirling.

ALLAN C Steele (Letters, January 11) hits the nail on the head with his observation from recent experience that our excellent NHS can be let down by poor communication

In my experience the most common cause of dissatisfaction has always been the sometimes poor communication between specialties, general practice, and patients – when timely contact or explanation could have avoided much angst.

As a retired GP I reflect on my own contribution to the problem, sometimes due to carelessness or time pressures.

R Russell Smith,

96 Milton Road, Kilbirnie.

SECTIONS of the media appear to be carrying out a relentless campaign to point out the deficiencies of the NHS both here in Scotland and across the UK. This constant negativity and indeed sometimes scaremongering must be very disheartening for those who work tirelessly in the NHS and indeed potentially worrying for people seeking their services. It is time to temper this constant flow of scare stores with some recognition of the terrific work that the NHS does in difficult circumstances and perhaps my own very recent experience may give some comfort to those who might be calling on the NHS in the weeks to come.

In November I had some minor surgery to remove a lump on my back. The diagnostic result of this procedure was not good and required further extensive tests and somewhat more extensive surgery. I confess that this was a slightly worrying period for me particularly since it would span the festive season. However the reaction of all of those who I came in contact with in the NHS was absolutely superb. Communication was terrific, appointments were made quickly and carried out efficiently and the final surgery last week was executed very professionally.

I have nothing but the highest praise for our NHS and am extremely grateful that we have so many dedicated people working within it. Reality, certainly in my case, was far removed from the doom-laden reports of the media.

Peter Shakeshaft,

30/11 Barnton Grove, Edinburgh.