So much for my blog, I just haven't got round to writing it. Small issue of being distracted by other issues and indeed, Covid.
My main concern is that, as I understand it, NHS organisations will assess whether there is value in undertaking an investigation for learning. If they feel that the incident has happened before, and been amply investigated, they may chose to take no action. But how do they know that there's no new learning unless the undertake an investigation? And if there was learning, then was this applied successfully - maybe not if the incident/harm was repeated?
The unintended consequence that gives me most concern is the potential impact on patients and family members. If there's harm and yet the organisational response is that no investigation is needed, how will patients and family members feel about this? Will they consider that the Trust has complied with their legal duty of candour? Will they feel that in order to get answers as to what happened and why and to get redress, they need to make a formal complaint? Will they be offered a mediation approach and if so, how will this be informed if there is no investigation? Will this frustrate families into a more litigious approach?
It will be very interesting to hear from the pilot Trusts and CCGs as to whether this has been an issue for them. And if so, what their advice would be to NHSE/I?
And have patient organisations been engaged for their views?
What do others think?
Helen