Comments on: Warner on health records: spin first, and have a token consultation too http://idealgovernment.com/2006/06/warner_on_health_records_spin_first_and_have_a_token_consultation_too/ What do we want from Internet-age government? Wouldn't it be better if... Sat, 04 Feb 2012 10:03:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Richard S http://idealgovernment.com/2006/06/warner_on_health_records_spin_first_and_have_a_token_consultation_too/comment-page-1/#comment-877 Richard S Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:08:06 +0000 http://warner_on_health_records_spin_first_and_have_a_token_consultation_too#comment-877 I do hope that we're getting an improved process rather than just automation of the existing process: I've have bad experiences of medical records: Mine contain serious inaccuracies but current rules do not allow patients to get these corrected. While these records exist only on paper the hazard is physically limited: Digitizing these inaccurate records & making them more widely available would make them a greater hazard. Rather than just digitizing existing dodgy medical records and worrying only about their security, at least two further steps are needed: 1. A thorough review medical records: Their purpose; function; contents; structure; mobility; etc. etc. 2. Thorough data cleansing of existing medical records. However, data cleansing would probably be impossibly expensive: It may be more practical to start with a clean slate and import only very limited, thoroughly checked information from previous paper records. In this case, doctors would still need access to the paper records for several more decades. How does this compare with the hype or actuality of the NHS IT programme? Professional medical staff *should* have a clearer understanding about the real requirements for medical records; but seems to have had little involvement in the NHS IT programme: Patients have had even less! I do hope that we’re getting an improved process rather than just automation of the existing process:

I’ve have bad experiences of medical records: Mine contain serious inaccuracies but current rules do not allow patients to get these corrected.

While these records exist only on paper the hazard is physically limited: Digitizing these inaccurate records & making them more widely available would make them a greater hazard.

Rather than just digitizing existing dodgy medical records and worrying only about their security, at least two further steps are needed:

1. A thorough review medical records: Their purpose; function; contents; structure; mobility; etc. etc.

2. Thorough data cleansing of existing medical records.

However, data cleansing would probably be impossibly expensive: It may be more practical to start with a clean slate and import only very limited, thoroughly checked information from previous paper records. In this case, doctors would still need access to the paper records for several more decades.

How does this compare with the hype or actuality of the NHS IT programme?

Professional medical staff *should* have a clearer understanding about the real requirements for medical records; but seems to have had little involvement in the NHS IT programme: Patients have had even less!

]]>