Translate the text from Welsh to English.



 
Mae’n bleser gennyf gyhoeddi’r adroddiad a gynhyrchwyd gan yr adolygiad annibynnol o Broses Ceisiadau Cyllido Cleifion Unigol GIG Cymru (CCCU).  
Mae pob bwrdd iechyd yn defnyddio’r broses hon i benderfynu a ddylai claf unigol gael mynediad i driniaeth nad yw ar gael fel rheol, ai peidio.  
  
Daw yn sgil adolygiad CCCU yn 2014 a gweithredu ei argymhellion yntau.  Cytunais ei fod yn bryd bellach am adolygiad o’r newydd o’r broses CCCU, â phwyslais wahanol.  Cyhoeddais ef fis Gorffennaf diwethaf fel rhan o’r Compact i Symud Cymru Ymlaen.  Y nod oedd canolbwyntio ar nifer y paneli a’r meini prawf eithriadolrwydd clinigol, gan gymryd persbectif y claf i ystyriaeth.  
  
Hoffwn gymryd y cyfle hwn i ddiolch i’r grŵp adolygu am eu gwaith caled a’u hymroddiad wrth ymdopi ag amserlen heriol ar gyfer cwblhau eu gwaith.  Mae arbenigedd a phrofiad y grŵp ar y cyd \- Mr Andrew Blakeman (cadeirydd), yr Athro Peter Littlejohns, yr Athro Chris Newdick, yr Athro Phil Routledge, y Dr Ben Thomas, Mr Irfon Williams and Mr Keith Cass MBE – wedi arwain at adroddiad sy’n cyfuno tosturi â realiti gwneud penderfyniadau anodd, sensitif.  Rwy’n arbennig o ddiolchgar i’r grŵp adolygu am ddarparu eu dealltwriaeth a’u harbenigedd am ddim ac ar ben eu hamserlenni llawn.  
  
Nodaf fod yr adroddiad yn cymeradwyo sawl agwedd o’r broses CCCU bresennol, ac yn gwneud argymhellion i’w gwella ym mhellach.  Mae’r grŵp adolygu wedi dod i’r casgliad y dylem gadw’r drefn bresennol o baneli CCCU ar wahân, o ystyried costau a risgiau newid nifer y paneli.  .   
  
Mae’r grŵp adolygu wedi ystyried yn fanwl iawn fater cymhleth eithriadolrwydd clinigol.  Maent yn dod i’r casgliad y dylai’r egwyddor am wneud penderfyniadau ar lefel claf unigol o ran mynediad i driniaeth gael ei seilio ar lefel y lles clinigol a ddisgwylir ac a yw’r triniaeth yn cynnig gwerth rhesymol am arian.  Mae’r grŵp adolygu yn gwneud sawl argymhelliad i gymryd lle “eithriadolrwydd clinigol” ac i gryfhau’r meini prawf a ddefnyddir i wneud penderfyniadau ar lefel claf unigol.    
  
Mae persbectif y claf yn lliwio pob tudalen o’r adroddiad hwn, a seilir ar y dystiolaeth a gasglodd y grŵp adolygu mor ddiwyd.  Mae’r 10 gweithdy a gynhaliwyd yn Wrecsam, Aberystywth a Chaerdydd yn crynhoi profiad a barn cleifion – y mae mynd drwy’r broses CCCU yn cael effaith mor fawr arnynt – a barn clinigwyr a gweithwyr gofal iechyd proffesiynol sy’n gweithio â hi bob dydd.  Mae’r toreth o dystiolaeth ysgrifenedig yn cofnodi â chryn fanylder brofiadau cleifion o’r broses CCCU a sut maent yn teimlo amdani yn ogystal â thystiolaeth feddylgar oddi wrth elusennau iechyd, clinigwyr, staff byrddau iechyd a’r diwydiant fferyllol.  Cafwyd cyfanswm o 68 o gyfranwyr a anfonodd dystiolaeth ysgrifenedig, a fynychodd weithdy, neu’r ddau.  Diolchaf iddynt oll am gymryd yr amser i rannu eu profiadau a’u harbenigedd.  
  
Yn awr, byddaf yn ystyried yr adroddiad a’i argymhellion yn fwy manwl a gwneud ddatganiad am y camau nesaf cyn bo hir.

 http://gov.wales/topics/health/nhswales/funding/?lang\=en   








Translation:


 
I am pleased to publish the report produced by independent review of the NHS Wales Individual Patient Funding Request Process (IPFR).  

  

All health boards use this process to decide whether or not an individual patient should have access to a treatment which is not routinely available.  

  

This follows an IPFR review in 2014 and the implementation of its recommendations.  I agreed the time was now right for a fresh review of the IPFR process, with a different emphasis. I announced this last July as part of the Compact to Move Wales Forward.  Its aim was to focus on the number of panels and the clinical exceptionality criteria, taking into account the patient’s perspective.  

  

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the review group them for their hard work and dedication in meeting a challenging timeframe for concluding their work.  The combined expertise and experience of the group \- Mr Andrew Blakeman (chair), Professor Peter Littlejohns, Professor Chris Newdick, Professor Phil Routledge, Dr Ben Thomas, Mr Irfon Williams and Mr Keith Cass MBE \- has resulted in a report that blends compassion with the realities of making difficult, sensitive decisions.  I am especially grateful to the review group for providing their insight and expertise free of charge and around their demanding schedules.  

  

I note that the report endorses several aspects of the current IPFR process, and makes  recommendations for further improvements.  The review group has concluded that we should retain the current system of separate IPFR panels, given the costs and risks of changing the number of panels.    

  

The review group has considered at length the complex issue of clinical exceptionality.  

They conclude that the principle for making decisions at an individual patient level about access to a treatment should be based upon the level of expected clinical benefit and whether the treatment offers reasonable value for money. The review group makes several recommendations to replace “clinical exceptionality” and to strengthen the criteria used to make decisions at the individual patient level.  

  

The patient perspective informs every page of this report, which is grounded in the evidence that the review group gathered so diligently.  The 10 workshops held in Wrexham, Aberystwyth and Cardiff summarise the experiences and opinions of patients \- who are hugely affected by going through the IPFR process \- and of clinicians and other healthcare workers who work with it every day.  The wealth of written evidence chronicles in some depth patients’ encounters with the IPFR process and how they feel about it as well as including thoughtful evidence from health charities, clinicians, health board staff and the pharmaceutical industry.  A total of 68 contributors sent in written evidence, attended a workshop, or both. I  thank them all for taking the time to share their experience and expertise.  

  

I will now consider the report and its recommendations in more detail and will make a statement about the next steps shortly.


  

http://gov.wales/topics/health/nhswales/funding/?lang\=en