Food offering at Scottish hospitals to be improved PATIENTS have been promised better quality hospital food by the government as part of a shake-up of nutrition and catering in Scotland's National Health Service. Improved standards in the quality of food served to people in hospital wards will be introduced in the New Year, Scotland's health secretary Alex Neil pledged. The shake-up will include a tougher inspection regime as well as a consultation on whether to introduce a legal duty on health boards to serve patients good quality hospital meals. There will also be a further £300,000 invested to help health boards improve nutritional care on top of funding of more than £1.75 million, the Scottish government said it had provided since 2008. Ministers confirmed that the £300,000 would be used to implement the new standards in hospitals across Scotland, as the scheme was announced today. The new guidelines about the standard of food hospitals will expected to serve to patients will be published in January, with the rules set to cover nutritional and dietary requirements. Scotland would be the first country in the UK to make nutritional standards in hospital food a legal requirement if the proposals set out by Mr Neil are approved. Mr Neil said: "We already have rigorous standards in place, and clear guidance about how these standards can be met. Catering teams, dieticians, specialist consultants and nursing staff are doing great work to ensure that patients are getting nutritious and balanced diets in hospital. We have made great progress, but I recognise that there is always more that can be done to drive up standards. We have been working on these new guidelines for some time as part of an ongoing review of nutritional standards. This is part of a package of measures that will help to ensure that hospital food continues to improve, that NHS boards have the appropriate amount of support and advice that they need to deliver these improvements and that we have an even stronger inspection process. The plan was welcomed by the British Medical Association (BMA), which said poor quality food served to patients can lead to longer hospital stays and health complications. However, the BMA - the group that represents the UK's medical profession - called on health authorities to limit the sales of sugary and fatty snacks available in hospital premises, such as crisps and chocolate sold from trolleys in wards, as well from vending machines. Dr Lewis Morrison, member of the BMA's Scottish Council said: "A significant number of patients admitted to hospitals in Scotland are undernourished, many of whom are aged over 65. This can contribute to prolonged ill health, clinical complications, delayed recovery and therefore longer hospital stays, so it is important they while they're in hospital, we help to provide the nutrition these patients need to help in their recovery. Dr Morrison added: "However it is not just in hospital kitchens - if they still exist - where hospitals can improve on catering. Patients can be found enjoying crisps, sweets and unhealthy fizzy drinks all sold to them from trolleys on the wards or in concessions on the hospital premises. Hospital corridors are littered with vending machines selling high sugar, high fat food and drink to patients, visitors and staff. These unhealthy foods are supplementing the poor quality of hospital food. Ministers also faced calls to make more funds available for the improvements and to ensure the planned hospital food inspections on wards were unannounced. Scottish Conservative health spokesman Jackson Carlaw said: "Any indication that the Scottish Government is willing to improve the standard of hospital meals is welcome. We still believe that unannounced inspections of catering facilities is the best way to ensure standards are raised, and I look forward to seeing more detail on this. It's well known that healthy, wholesome food increases a patient's chance of recovery. With that in mind, it's inconceivable that having top quality hospital food should be anything other than a priority. But £300,000 is a response of sorts but it smacks of being more of a response to uncomfortable headlines rather than a budget to tackle the issue comprehensively.