Andrew Ottaway

The Trust at which I work had a serious issue with misuse of DATIX, with the CQC highlighting the issue of staff-disengagement that resulted. I approached the then-FTSU Guardian with information on a web-app, Cloud-based pseudo-anonymised engagement platform that staff could use to raise issues without fear of retribution. That platform has now been in-service for around six months, supporting the Guardian, and providing a channel of communications beyond FTSU, and includes access to many departments and Trust execs.

DATIX has a place in patient safety, but there may be better alternatives. Surgical specialist teams for example, have the CORESS confidential reporting system (https://www.coress.org.uk/), while some might find platforms such as 'Say-So' (https://www.say-so.co.uk/) or WorkInConfidence (https://www.workinconfidence.com/) more appropriate.

Having worked across a number of industries prior to joining the NHS, I'm aware that there's increasing interest in Human & Organisational Factors, and that disclosure, dialogue, resolution and analysis platforms form an important aspect in improving safety standards. 

Thoroughly enjoyed reading the article, Jono, as it articulates many of my observations on reporting systems, Human and Organisational Factors, and workplace 'culture' in health and social-care as experienced in a number of other sectors, notably aviation, rail, and offshore exploration and production. 

I feel there are many lessons we could learn from our colleagues in other industries, and we have a significant amount of expertise within the NHS with the skills and experience to take us forward, once we've found a way to overcome the pushback against Safety Management Systems and Governance. 

Great article, and thanks for sharing it with us. 

Hi @Claire Cox I agree that it does appear that there's a significant loophole in patient safety, and I find it odd that while the CQC can and indeed do make comment in their inspection reports regarding staff-engagement - sometimes quite critical comment - there seems to be no indication that a system similar to FTSUG is demanded of private healthcare establishments in the same way that they do of NHS Trusts. I hope that this is an oversight to be addressed, and not an indication that FTSUG is seen as a panacea for public consumption.

I applaud the integrity of the Originator of this thread for highlighting the iniquity in our healthcare sector, where a private institution performing procedures often on behalf of the NHS is not required to provide a platform that enables and encourages staff witnessing misconduct or improper behaviour to speak-up. It does seem a little odd that while NHS establishments are required as part of their mandate to have a "Freedom To Speak Up Guardian" system, private healthcare providers do not.

I am aware that there is an alternative, commercial, system that provides staff with a safe platform for raising issues, and a number of social-care organisations and NHS Trusts are presently benefiting from the pseudo-anonymised firewall that is a security feature, enabling dialogue without the possibility of compromised personal security and the fear of retribution such as we see in this case. This platform is currently under consideration by a number of CCG, and has been presented to STP and HSCP in the UK and similar organisations abroad.