Harry Cayton to chair new patient data body

07 Nov 2008

Harry Cayton
OBE

Harry Cayton OBE is to chair the new National Information Governance Board for Health and Social Care (NIGB), which becomes a statutory body later this month.

Cayton was formerly the Chair of the Care Record Development Board (CRDB) - the predecessor of the NIGB - and chaired a ministerial task force on the summary care record in 2006.

The NIGB will ensure that patient data is stored and used securely by providing leadership and promoting consistent standards for information governance across health and social care.

The new body has operated in shadow form since October 2007 when it took over the functions of the CRDB.

The information governance board will also cover the areas that were previously the remit of the Patient Information Advisory Group (PIAG). In addition, it will tackle the ethical and legal interpretation and application of policies, procedures and guidance at national level.

The new board will oversee all information governance matters relating to information obtained or generated as part of the delivery of the health service or adult social care functions by a local social services authority in England, irrespective of whether the patient is identified. There is no indication yet of whether the Board will have a secretariat to support it.

According to the DH, the board will be able to deal directly with organisations and individuals using this data on general information governance matters and to provide advice without being asked to do so.

The body will be able to offer advice but lack stronger teeth: “All NHS providers and local social services authorities dealing with adult social care will have a statutory obligation to take note of advice from the NIGB.”

The DH says one of the key roles of the board will be “to seek regular assurance that NHS providers and local social services authorities have considered their information governance policies and procedures and have determined they are fit for purpose”.

Health Minister Ben Bradshaw said in a statement: “I welcome the appointment of Harry Cayton as chair of the NIGB as a statutory body which has been established to improve how confidential patient data is handled.”

The minister added “NIGB has an important role to play in raising the bar for teams across health and social care handling sensitive patient data.”

Cayton, said: “Information technology has become an integral part of our everyday lives and information governance is becoming a 21st century challenge. Sharing records in ways that improve people’s care and are confidential and safe must be our objective.”

He added: “The NIGB will be committed to protecting patients’ interests and advising the NHS and social care on how best to maintain public trust and confidence in co-ordinated services.”

Key topics which the NIGB gave guidance on, while in shadow form, have included: children’s summary care record; access by locums to NPfIT systems; the social care record guarantee; the information governance tool kit; the review of the secondary uses service; and the security of NHS data.

Jon Hoeksma

Reader's Comments

Harry Cayton?

stressfreedave@hotmail.com

07 Nov 08 09:49

I might have got my names mixed up, but I thought Mr Cayton used to work for/with CfH, the people that seem to be looking for more ways to share identifiable data and who don't seem to know how many staff at BT will have access to identifiable data (I got an email from CfH 9 months ago saying they would find out, but still no reply).

Unless Mr Cayton has changed his attitude towards patient confidentality, I dread to think who else will be given access to medical records.

Harry's game

07 Nov 08 14:02

Harry Cayton used to be the National Director for Patients within the Department of Health, as well as being a former Chief Exec of a patient organisation (Alzheimer's Society). So someone with a view of both sides of the patient / NHS divide and maybe someone trying to chart a pragmatic course between the risks and benefits of information sharing. Certainly approach to privacy in the Ministerial Taskforce report may not have been perfect, but it was an attempt to find a pragmatic and inclusive solution to a difficult and emotive problem.

Unlike SFD, I don't doubt Mr Cayton's integrity. However, it would be nice to see the NIGB develop into something akin to an Information Commissioners Office for the NHS, capable of issuing clear, unambiguous guidance and providing assistance to those trying to meet IG standards. The worry is that it will be another woolly attempt at enforcement - a limp stick and no carrot.

Now, must get on with finding ways to share identifiable data....

Is this duplication?

10 Nov 08 13:13

Since the Information Commissioner already covers the NHS, I'd hope that the NIGB will not become something similar. Hopefully, they will talk to each other. Where though does this leave all the Information Governance activities of CfH?

End of restraint by Section 60?

maryhawking@tigers.demon.co.uk

12 Nov 08 08:50

"The information governance board will also cover the areas that were previously the remit of the Patient Information Advisory Group (PIAG). In addition, it will tackle the ethical and legal interpretation and application of policies, procedures and guidance at national level."

Wasn't PIAG set up by statute in the Health and Social Care Act to supervise the application of section 60? *Can* it just be abolished and the protection given to individuals against routine breaches of individual patient information in the interests of the Greater Good provided by My Research be swept aside like this? Information governance does not appear to include limitation of inappropriately authorised access: or does it?

"The new board will oversee all information governance matters relating to information obtained or generated as part of the delivery of the health service or adult social care functions by a local social services authority in England, irrespective of whether the patient is identified."

Does this include the clinical governance of structure and content of medical (and social care) records, or only what is done with the contents? For instance, in a single shared electronic patient record, will this board be charged with responsibility for sorting out the medico-legal implications of prescribing - and stopping prescribing - by different organisations?

"There is no indication yet of whether the Board will have a secretariat to support it."

I sincerely hope they will have adequate support to perform a useful function! We really don't need to have PIAG replaced by a rubber stamp!

When do we get the details? It seems incredible that the board can have been running in shadow form with no idea as to what - if any - administrative support they can plan on having..

Replacing PIAG

stressfreedave@hotmail.com

12 Nov 08 15:47

PIAG was only ever meant to be a temp thing until it was replaced. All that is happening is people are not being told on a wider scale that PIAG is being replaced.

I do not see the new body being any worse or better than PIAG. Section Sixty will still be getting used by researchers to get their paws on our information because of their demand to know and the fact the public are kept in the dark about researchers getting our information. I also assume that the loop hole being used by Bury PCT to access data on the national SUS database without Section Sixty aproval will not be closed