Welcome Guest | Login | Register | Why Register?
HOME | CONTACT | NEWS ARCHIVE | DOCUMENT LIBRARY | FEATURES | COMMENT & ANALYSIS | EVENTS | RESEARCH REPORTS | CASE STUDIES | FORUMS

Hants and IOW share records for 1.5 million patients

31 May 2006

Hospital and GP records for 1.5 million patients are to be available for the NHS to share in a ground-breaking project launched ahead of the national NHS Care Records Service.

The Clinical Data Repository (CDR) set up by Hampshire and Isle of Wight Strategic Health Authority has gone live this month with GP records for 650,000 patients, nearly half a million hospital documents and 2,000 single assessment process (SAP) records already available to view and more due to be added soon.

The information was uploaded to the CDR after an extensive local publicity campaign to the 1.5 million patients in Hampshire and on the Isle of Wight, which advised people of their right to opt-out and gave them an opportunity to view their records before they were uploaded on to the system.

Out of 1.5 million patients in the area, only around 1,150 patients have so far chosen to opt out. Once uploaded, patient records may only be accessed with explicit informed consent from patients.

The system creates a common record with different views according to the role of the member of staff with a series of easy-to-view screens covering everything from past medical history, GP medication, hospital medication, laboratory results, community nursing contacts, out-of-hours contacts and details of hospital care.

Information from GP practices is updated each night with 76 practices currently linked to the project, based mainly in the south and west of Hampshire, and plans in hand to extend coverage to the east and north of the county as soon as possible.

The SHA says it anticipates all GP records being on the system by autumn this year and the intention is to run the system until the delayed NHS Care Records Service (CRS), being developed by the NHS National Programme for IT (NPfIT), becomes available – now projected to begin in either 2007 or 2008.

The consent model for the initial upload of information to the repository is on an opt-out basis as proposed for the NHS CRS – a system which has failed to win the support of both the British Medical Association’s General Practitioner Committee and the Royal College of General Practitioners.

However Dr Nigel Watson, chief executive of Wessex Local Medical Committee (LMC) and a GP in Hampshire, said the project had received the full backing of the LMC. He told EHI Primary Care: “The team has spent a long time working with the LMC on this and thrashing out the issues. As far as I am concerned I think this could definitely save lives and I am quite comfortable with it.”

Dr Watson, a member of the GPC, supports an opt-out model for the NHS CRS and said that he believed that trust in those running a system was key to its support.

He added: “We have worked quite closely with the people that have been doing this and we trust what they have done. There is a lot of paranoia about, some of it perhaps justified, and the fundamental issues are not necessarily about the technicalities of how a system is run.”

A spokesperson for the SHA said 750,000 leaflets were delivered by Royal Mail to households within Hampshire and Isle of Wight during January to March 2005 outlining the CDR. In addition, leaflets are available in hospital and GP practice waiting rooms and practices have been asked to give the leaflet to all newly registered patients.

A press release was also sent to all newspapers, radio and television stations within Hampshire and Isle of Wight.

She added: “There have been approx 4,000 phone calls from the public in response to this initial campaign that ran last year. There continue to be two to three phone calls a week from patients picking up the leaflet in the waiting rooms requesting more information.”

The CDR is accessible over NHSnet and is designed to be used by clinicians working in out-of-hours, accident and emergency departments, GP practices, hospital pharmacies and in the community. Eight out of ten out-of-hours services within the SHA have agreed to use it. Records will be available for any staff treating patients to view, subject to password control and the explicit consent of the patient being treated. An audit trail identifies when patient records have been accessed and by whom and patients can ask for a copy of the audit trail.

Just over 1,000 NHS staff currently has access to the CDR and there are currently more than 10,000 NHS staff logins a month, less than two weeks after its official launch.

Only Read coded clinical data is downloaded from practices with free text suppressed as part of a move to protect patients’ confidentiality. The system is capable of accepting records from all the major GP system suppliers,

In addition, hospital records from 460,000 patients are currently on the CDR from Winchester, Southampton and Portsmouth hospital trusts. Work to include documents from north Hampshire and the Isle of Wight hospital trusts is continuing.

Further developments will include a project to enable electronic transmission and upload of hospital correspondence to GP systems and analytical services to support cancer services, practice based commissioning and local clinical audits.

The technology behind the CDR in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight has been delivered by Graphnet Health.

Tony Sharer, Graphnet's operations director, said the keys to the success of the scheme had been the project’s ability to get clinician and patient buy-in and the work that had been done on data quality.

He added: “You have also got have a flexible technology to construct these things so it can be bent and shaped to what people want.”

In addition to GP and hospital records the CDR will also hold occupational therapy records, with record for 13,500 patients already on the system, and single assessment process forms which social services staff can access.

The work in Hampshire stems from the area’s involvement in the Electronic Record Development and Implementation Programme (ERDIP) between 2000 and 2003.

Link

Graphnet Health

© 2006 E-HEALTH-MEDIA LTD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

1

Did patients really opt in?

31 May 06 09:22

I think it is wrong to say that most patients have willingly signed up to this system. Most patients did not realise that they had to telephone to opt out. It should have been the other way round...you telephoned to opt in. Was the reason that people wouldn't have opted in if they allowed this option? Also should they not publicise how you opt out now if you chose to? After all it is not compulsory. There have been coments from the LMC and others which indicate that having electronic information will be extremely helpful in diagnosis etc. presumably out of hours is an example...but what happens when the system fails?


2

Opting in, opting out and getting real

31 May 06 11:52

I suspect that the opt out consent model was the only realistic way of making this project work - it's a microcosm of the issues that need to be resolved for the care record service.

The biggest problem with opt in is getting people to understand that their data is not already collected, stored, processed and shared in this way. Make people explicitly opt in by phone, and the vast majority just wouldn't get round to it - which is not the same as people being actively opposed to it. Chasing them up would be expensive and time consuming.

I expect the low level of opting out and the overall public acceptance of this system when they see the benefits will make a convincing case for adopting this model for the care record service. Lets hope that the GMC and others advocating opt in watch and learn.


3

Trust

mary.hawking@nhs.net

01 Jun 06 09:29

"Dr Watson ... said that he believed that trust in those running a system was key to its support." Isn't this the real problem with CRS?


4

IOW is not a pure 'opt out'

gji@nhs.net

01 Jun 06 23:53

This is not an 'opt out' model. Although information is sent without explicit consent, it cannot be accessed without explicit patient consent. This is why (depsite the false information fed by various people including at least one NCL), it is comletely different from the NCRS.

For the NCRS, once information is present there is no requirement for explicit patient consent before it is accessed.

This is why the IOW is (sort of) acceptable, but the proposed NCRS pure opt-out is not.

Grant


5

Good news surely?

02 Jun 06 09:26

Sorry to interrupt the overwhelmingly negative responses (as usual). I think this Trust should be congratulated for their achievements. I, for one, am very cheered by this report.


6

This is Good News!

06 Jun 06 21:59

The original National Care Record Service concept was a system that made patient information available at the point of need for patient and care provider across care settings. GPs are the source of this information augmented by secondary and tertiary care. Hampshire and IOW have approached this in a way that will be good for patients now and into any NCRS future. Let us not underestimate the will and effort that went into this happening. Wish my own implementation community were moving in this direction.


7

Great project, limited access

28 Jun 06 21:20

This is well done and provides much better records access for agencies providing patient care including Out of Hours primary care services.

The network and hardware access remains a problem. District nurses can't access the system because they have very few terminals, they're not accessible from the patient's bedside and the networks shift data like a snail on valium. But it's something to look forward to when we can access it!


8

CM site still contributing

21 May 08 22:17

Could someone from either the Health Authority or Winchester Hospitals please confirm whether this Trust is still contributing documents to the Hampshire health record since it went live with the Cerner Millennium application.


9

Missing the whole point of CRS

22 May 08 08:37

As part of the same region -but in the North of the southern region -we already have the official NATIONAL CRS solution. Part of our region turning tale and buying in a commercial system says two things to me; 1) fujitsu cerner need a kick up the rear end as a small commerial firm manage in a small time frame what Fujitsu should have deployed by contract 2 years ago.

2) what the hell? All these offshoots and a wastage of raw cash instead of focusing on the national solution - at least they could have included the whole region, wasn't that the point of co-joining seperate regions?

Personally, I am gobsmacked but such wasage of money and shortsigtness of this solution


10

Data from Millennium

Jenny.nash@hampshirepct.nhs.uk

22 May 08 20:20

Data flows from Winchester and Eastleigh Hospitals Trusts stopped when CRS was deployed. However, we hope that documentation will start to flow again over the next few months, with pathology and discharge summaries being made available to support out of hours, emergency and shared care. (Jenny Nash, CIO, Hampshire PCT)


11

CDR is complementary to CRS

Jenny.nash@hampshirepct.nhs.uk

22 May 08 20:48

The original CDR (Clinical Data Repository) project was born (as the 2006 article states) from the earlier ERPDIP (Electronic Record Development and Implementation Programme).

As a predominantly read only solution, the CDR is not a substitute for CRS. It is more an interim to the SCR (Summary Care Record) – which we hope will replace it within the next few years. The CDR does not try to replace the operational CRS solution but complement it and the (multitude) of existing clinical systems across Hampshire. The CDR is fed from both primary and secondary care systems, with plans to include community (peripatetic) information. The CDR provides an accessible patient record which supports a number of services including for out of hours/emergency services.

Hampshire has deployed CRS to Winchester and Eastleigh Hospitals trusts and parts of Hampshire Partnership Trust and Hampshire PCT. This demonstrates Hampshire’s commitment to the CRS programme while continuing to maximise use of information collected at a local level to support patient care across organisations.

CDR was developed under the old Hampshire and IOW SHA and continues to cover three PCT areas. Since the creation of South Central SHA, information about all IM&T systems/solutions including CDR has been made widely shared between organisations

Search
News Features Jobs Newsletters
latest forum posts
latest forum posts
Top jobs
More
Top jobs

Featured_recruiters
Featured_recruiters