Search the hub
Showing results for tags 'Interoperability'.
-
Content Article
The future of digital health portals (May 2024)
Patient-Safety-Learning posted an article in Patient engagement
The use of digital health portals, including websites, apps and online consultations, has expanded. The pandemic and increasing public acceptance of digital tools has driven this change. However, this has also led to inconsistency in definitions, language and terminologies used within them, and there is also a significant variation in their functionality. This research by the Professional Record Standards Body (PSRB) and the Patient Information Forum (PIF) aimed to understand the current use of portals and the barriers to increasing engagement for people with long-term conditions to manage their own care better using existing tools and new innovations in the future. Key findings and recommendations User feedback is generally positive about digital health portals. However, there are some barriers to access and use of such portals, including lack of public awareness, lack of proper integration in care pathways, and digital inclusion. Evidence showing the effectiveness of portals in the UK is lacking. However, UK commissioners and suppliers are beginning to see efficiency benefits from appointment portals. These include reducing missed appointments and the cost of printing and postage. Clinicians do not see the benefits of portals. Work plans are not adjusted to accommodate the split of face-to-face and digital work. Digital work is perceived as extra workload rather than a change in model.- Posted
-
- Patient engagement
- Patient portal
- (and 3 more)
-
Community Post
Better use of data for medication safety in hospitals
Kenny Fraser posted a topic in Medicine management
- Hospital ward
- Pharmacist
-
(and 46 more)
Tagged with:
- Hospital ward
- Pharmacist
- Integrated Care System (ICS)
- Decision making
- Information processing
- Knowledge issue
- Non-compliance
- Omissions
- Climate change
- AI
- Digital health
- Innovation
- Interoperability
- Precision medicine
- Start-Up
- Safety assessment
- Safety behaviour
- Safety management
- Improved productivity
- Medication - related
- Patient identification
- Patient safety strategy
- Policies
- protocols and procedures
- User-centred design
- Workforce management
- Information sharing
- Staff engagement
- Training
- Time management
- Allergies
- Deep vein thrombosis
- Falls
- Parkinsons disease
- Substance / Drug abuse
- Urinary tract infections
- Antimicrobial resistance (AMR)
- Benchmarking
- Dashboard
- Indicators
- Meta analysis
- Task analysis
- Workload analysis
- NRLS
- Policies / Protocols / Procedures
- Quality improvement
- Risk management
- Healthcare
NHS hospital staff spend countless hours capturing data in electronic prescribing and medicines administration systems. Yet that data remains difficult to access and use to support patient care. This is a tremendous opportunity to improve patient safety, drive efficiencies and save time for frontline staff. I have just published a post about this challenge and Triscribe's solution. I would love to hear any comments or feedback on the topic... How could we use this information better? What are hospitals already doing? Where are the gaps? Thanks- Posted
- 2 replies
-
1
-
- Hospital ward
- Pharmacist
-
(and 46 more)
Tagged with:
- Hospital ward
- Pharmacist
- Integrated Care System (ICS)
- Decision making
- Information processing
- Knowledge issue
- Non-compliance
- Omissions
- Climate change
- AI
- Digital health
- Innovation
- Interoperability
- Precision medicine
- Start-Up
- Safety assessment
- Safety behaviour
- Safety management
- Improved productivity
- Medication - related
- Patient identification
- Patient safety strategy
- Policies
- protocols and procedures
- User-centred design
- Workforce management
- Information sharing
- Staff engagement
- Training
- Time management
- Allergies
- Deep vein thrombosis
- Falls
- Parkinsons disease
- Substance / Drug abuse
- Urinary tract infections
- Antimicrobial resistance (AMR)
- Benchmarking
- Dashboard
- Indicators
- Meta analysis
- Task analysis
- Workload analysis
- NRLS
- Policies / Protocols / Procedures
- Quality improvement
- Risk management
- Healthcare
-
Content Article
The Digital Medicines Transformation Portfolio aims to use digital technologies to make prescribing, dispensing and administering medicines everywhere in Wales, easier, safer and more efficient for patients and professionals. It brings together the programmes and projects that will deliver a fully digital prescribing approach in all care settings in Wales. This video outlines the different elements of the portfolio that will be introduced across primary and secondary care, including the Shared Medicines Record, which will store information about a patient's medications all in one place.- Posted
-
- Medication
- Prescribing
- (and 5 more)
-
Content Article
This is part of our series of Patient Safety Spotlight interviews, where we talk to people working for patient safety about their role and what motivates them. Gordon talks to us about how bureaucracy in the health service can compromise patient safety, the vital importance of agreed quality standards and what hillwalking has taught him about healthcare safety.- Posted
-
1
-
- Checklists
- Standards
- (and 5 more)
-
Content Article
For many years the NHS has talked about the need to shift to a more personalised approach to health and care—where people have choice and control over the way their care is planned and delivered, based on “what matters” to them and their individual strengths, needs and preferences. In this HSJ article, Ben Wilson, product solution director at Orion Health, discusses the progress, benefits and future possibilities for an integrated, patient-centric healthcare system.- Posted
-
- Care record
- Technology
- (and 3 more)
-
Content Article
This is part of our series of Patient Safety Spotlight interviews, where we talk to people working for patient safety about their role and what motivates them. Maureen discusses the important role of professional standards in building a patient safety infrastructure, the need to reframe safety as a positive idea and her experience of implementing learning processes during her time as a GP.- Posted
-
1
-
- Data
- Care record
- (and 5 more)
-
Content Article
The first ever HETT North event, which brought together digital health leaders from across the country, took place in March 2023 in Manchester. The event highlighted the latest advancements in digital healthcare, and this blog reports on the final keynote session of the day, which focused on ‘Assessing the landscape of digital health transformation – past, present & future’. Key topics included identifying underlying issues that need to be addressed to allow for digital transformation, and the policy surrounding digital transformation in Integrated Care Systems (ICSs). Alongside Clive Flashman, Patient Safety Learning's Chief Digital Officer, the panel included: Sam Shah, Chair, HETT Steering Committee Henrietta Mbeah-Bankas, Head of Blended Learning & Digital Learning & Development Lead, Health Education England Tremaine Richard-Noel, Head of Emerging Technology, Northampton General Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Liz Ashall-Payne, CEO, ORCHA You can watch a video of the discussion on Youtube.- Posted
-
- Technology
- Interoperability
- (and 4 more)
-
Content Article
In his newsletter today (The Top 10 Dangers of Digital Health), the medical futurist, Bertalan Meskó, raises some very topical questions about the dangers of digital health. As a huge advocate of the benefits of digital health, I am aware of most of these but tend to downplay the negative aspects as I generally believe that in this domain the good outweighs the bad. However, as I was reading his article, I realised that it was written very much from the perspective of a clinician and, to some extent, a healthcare organisation too. The patient perspective was included but not from a patient safety angle. Many of the issues that he raises do have significant patient safety issues associated with them which I’d like to share in this blog. 1. Regulating adaptive AI algorithms Where an AI tool quickly adapts to reflect its environment and the context in which it operates, the AI may “reinforce those harmful biases such as discriminating based on one’s ethnicity and/or gender”. These will further exacerbate existing health inequalities and place certain patients at a disadvantage. It is important that the ground rules for these AI tools include firm parameters that seek to prioritise patient safety. A bit like Asimov’s Zeroth Law, ”a robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm”. 2. Hacking medical devices remotely The idea that hackers might target people's implantable cardiac devices was popularised in a 2012 episode of the US television drama ‘Homeland’, in which terrorists hacked a fictional vice president's pacemaker and killed him. It is not just VIPs (or VPs) who need to worry about this. Potentially anyone with an implanted device could have it hacked and be held to ransom. Medical device manufacturers should take far more care in the security that they build into their devices to protect patients from unwarranted attacks on them. Frankly, when large healthcare organisations are procuring these types of devices, this is one of the key areas that they should be interrogating their potential suppliers about. 3. Privacy breaches by and on direct-to-consumer devices and services This is a difficult one because if we want digital systems to really understand us and provide advice or treatment personalised to us, then those digital tools must have access to our confidential medical data. However, privacy is still very much a high priority for most patients and they (rightly) want to know what is happening to their data – who is using it, how long is it being held, is it being passed on to third parties without the patient’s explicit consent? People often forget who they have given access to their data, for what purpose and sometimes stop using a digital tool without realising that all of their data is still being held (and possibly collected via an active API) by the digital tool’s supplier. It would be helpful if our mobile phones and PCs could highlight: a. When we shared sensitive data, who with, and what data was shared. b. A list of active APIs that are still sharing our data, etc. Data that is used for purposes other than those intended by the patient are potentially a safety risk to that patient and should be treated as such. 4. Ransomware attacks on hospitals Yes, this is awful for the hospital, and yes, it may cost them money; however, let’s not forget whose data has been stolen, the patients’! Are they sufficiently alerted to this, told what is happening, given ways to mitigate any issues to them personally? In an ideal world they are, but in reality the hospital is probably in panic mode and communicating transparently with patients is low down on its priority list. As the Medical Futurist says: “The average patient should demand more security over their data” – but how do they do this? What can a single patient do to ensure that the hospitals who have stewardship over their data (not ownership in my opinion) make it as secure as possible. This brings me back to an idea that my sadly departed friend, Michael Seres, had many years ago. On each hospital exec team (not Board) there should be a Chief Patient Officer, whose job it is to push for patient interests in operational matters (which is why they shouldn’t be a non-exec member of the Board). That is the person whose job it should be to hold their organisation to account over the security of their patients’ data. 5. Technologies supporting self-diagnosis Dr Google has been an issue for some years, and people’s off-the-shelf devices that monitor their vital signs are not necessarily medical grade, nor do their users generally have the skill to interpret the outputs from them. However, doctors should embrace patients who are keen to manage their own chronic conditions and support them in doing so. This ‘shared accountability’ has to be the model for improved population health and doctors not willing to work with their patients shouldn’t have any. 6. Bioterrorism through digital health technologies A bit exotic this one and certainly not a near-term risk when looking at the sorts of things described in the newsletter. However, in a world that is still dealing with a pandemic, and reliant on vaccines to gain some normality back into our everyday lives, the security of (for example) that supply chain is critical. What if a batch was intentionally sabotaged or in some way its efficacy reduced? In exactly the same way that medical products (especially implants) should be made as safe and secure as possible, the same is true for the medicines that we rely on. 7. AI not tested in a real-life clinical setting The newsletter makes the case for issues related to how staff use the AI, but PLEASE… test this with patients first! Safety in use is critical and only feedback involving patients will help developers to optimise these digital tools to be as safe as possible. 8. Electronic medical records not being able to accommodate patient-obtained digital health data This is a very personal issue for me. Why should my doctor have to send me for tests when I can give him/her perfectly reasonable data that I have gathered myself from a device that has been CE marked and approved by the FDA/MHRA etc.? Electronic Medical Record vendors are incredibly reticent to allow anyone other than the authorised doctor to enter anything into a patient’s record. There are some good reasons for this. However, I’ve long thought that there could be an annexe to the record that is patient-controlled where they can enter a new address, add data from their own blood pressure device and over-the-counter drugs or remedies that they are taking. That way, doctors would have an up to date, (hopefully) reliable set of data to have a more informed discussion with their patient and it could accelerate the time between consultation and referral/treatment. 9. Face recognition cameras in hospitals I’m less worried by this in principle; however, I am interested to know how the data generated will be used and the security around it. If it is only used by the hospital to optimise patient flow, or remotely detect symptoms that are then used to help patients either directly or indirectly, then fine. If it is shared with others for more sinister purposes, then I would be concerned. 10. Health insurance: Dr Big Brother This is less relevant to the UK – only 11% of us have private health insurance. Again, this boils down to who collects data on patients, for what purposes, is explicit consent gained from the patient to share their data and how may those third parties use it? There are both negative and positive connotations to the gathering of a person’s health data by their health insurance company, but given that they already ask for access to all GP and secondary care records, having access to health wearable data (as Vitality Health already does) is not a big step. Conclusion I still believe that the benefits of digital health outweigh the risks, but the risks outlined above are not inconsequential. Many of the negative aspects are predicated on poor management and control of patient data. One of the ways that this should be mitigated is to have one or more patient representatives at an exec (not non-exec) level who hold healthcare organisations to account over this important aspect of care provision.- Posted
-
1
-
- Digital health
- Patient
- (and 6 more)
-
Content Article
Chances are, you’ve heard of an electronic health record, or EHR. Over the past 10 years, the vast majority of healthcare providers in the United States have implemented this technology to use in caring for their patients. EHRs have benefited us in many ways and hold tremendous promise. Given their widespread use, this technology now plays a significant role in the routine delivery of health care. Less understood outside the healthcare profession, however, is that EHRs have introduced new kinds of risks to the safety and quality of care, due to serious challenges with EHR usability, or the effectiveness and efficiency of using the technology. These well documented issues can lead to clinician burnout and errors that directly impact patient safety. In response, the MedStar Health National Center for Human Factors in Healthcare teamed up with the American Medical Association to show what they mean by sharing rare videos of real and simulated EHR usability challenges. They believe improving EHR design, development, and implementation to eliminate known patient safety risks and make them easier to use is the responsibility of healthcare providers, EHR vendors, policymakers, and patients, all working together. This page links to videos explaining what types of errors and challenges there are when using EHR's. By highlighting these errors and challenges may help mitigate future harm for patients.- Posted
-
- Interoperability
- Digital health
-
(and 2 more)
Tagged with:
-
Content Article
The Health and Social Care Select Committee is currently holding an Inquiry into Delivering Core NHS and Care Services during the Pandemic and Beyond. It’s stated aim is to ‘give focus to these upcoming strategic challenges, and give those working in the NHS and care sectors an opportunity to set out what help they will need from Government in meeting them’[1]. In its call for evidence the Inquiry has specifically identified ‘meeting the needs of rapidly discharged hospital patients with a higher level of complexity’ as one of the issues it will cover [2]. This is a joint submission (see attachment) to the Inquiry by Patient Safety Learning and CECOPS which is focused on this specific issue. During the initial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Government recognised that a key enabler would be to increase capacity within the NHS, ensuring that enough acute beds were available to cope with the rising tide of patients. An important policy priority has been to ensure the safe discharge of patients back into their home or, where appropriate, into a placement with a community provider. While there were already pathways in place to accelerate this process, responding to the pandemic required a significant acceleration of hospital discharges. Hospital discharges are complex. To enable a safe and timely transfer of care, they require good co-ordination between hospital and community staff to arrange clinical assessments and to equip the home or community setting with the appropriate equipment and care plans. In this submission to the Inquiry, Patient Safety Learning and CECOPS focus on: Rapid hospital discharge - considering the challenges to this caused by the pandemic, the importance of interoperability in overcoming these, preventing care homes and nursing homes becoming vectors of transmission and harnessing digital technologies, such as an app, to assist hospital discharges. Community support - as the rate of hospital discharges significantly increases, the need to consider the availability of Personal Protective Equipment supplies, access to and guidance on supportive equipment and technologies and other pressures that will need to be met by community support services. In the concluding comments the submission sets out an eight-point action plan required to tackle this issue: A model of demand to inform hospital discharge and planning of community and care services New agile ways of working using digital technologies. An improved cross health and social care information system is imperative to ensure safe transfers of care Strengthened cross-sector leadership and communication with clinical teams and patients and families The provision of equipment services addressed urgently - to support hospital discharge and prevent admissions i.e. wheelchair, prosthetic, orthotic and equipment services Integration of planning and service delivery across sectors with the right leadership, the ability and capacity at a local level to streamline services and procurement to the needs of patients, families, and care providers Innovation in the development of safe transfers of care. We must adapt the traditional bureaucratic processes and regulatory framework to ensure that the needs of patients are met speedily Financial support to ensure that there is capacity to provide community-based care The safety of patients at the core of all plans and service delivery. All plans should include how the safety of patients is being prioritised. References [1] UK Parliament, Delivering Core NHS and Care Services during the Pandemic and Beyond, Last Accessed 7 May 2020. https://committees.parliament.uk/work/277/delivering-core-nhs-and-care-services-during-the-pandemic-and-beyond/ [2] UK Parliament, Call for evidence: Delivering Core NHS and Care Services during the Pandemic and Beyond, Last Accessed 29 April 2020. https://committees.parliament.uk/call-for-evidence/131/delivering-core-nhs-and-care-services-during-the-pandemic-and-beyond/- Posted
-
- Recommendations
- Pandemic
-
(and 4 more)
Tagged with:
-
Content Article
The NHS is the world’s largest publicly funded health service. It is also the world’s largest repository of healthcare data, but these data are fragmented and underutilised. Making them accessible in one place would improve health and deliver wealth for the nation. This report by the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change proposes the creation of a National Data Trust (NDT)—an organisation which would be majority-owned and controlled by the government and the NHS, together with investment from industry partners. It would aim to connect NHS data, attract private investment in new medical discoveries and bring the economic benefits of health innovation to citizens. The authors believe the NDT would accelerate the NHS’s development of cutting-edge innovations, provide quicker access to these advancements at reduced costs and generate a new funding source for the healthcare system.- Posted
-
- Data
- Innovation
-
(and 4 more)
Tagged with:
-
Content Article
Implementing a new Electronic Patient Record (EPR) is a complex process and requires meticulous planning, coordination, involving change across every aspect of a healthcare organization. However, it also presents a unique opportunity to transform patient and staff experiences and enhance productivity by eliminating time-consuming manual processes. This webinar was hosted by Deloitte and brought together some of the UK digital health industry’s most experienced leaders with significant experience in implementing electronic patient records in their own organisations. Panellists included: Dr Cormac Breen, Chief Clinical Information Officer, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust Jacqui Cooper, RN Chief Nursing Information Officer, Health Innovation Manchester Professor Adrian Harris, Chief Medical Officer, Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust Dr Henry Morriss, Chief Clinical Information Officer, Manchester Royal Infirmary Consultant Emergency, and Intensive Care Medicine Frances Cousins, Digital Health Lead Partner, Deloitte UK Dr Afzal Chaudhry, Executive Chief Clinical Information Officer, Epic The speakers shared insights for success across a wide variety of topics including crafting a clinical safety case, safely transferring patient data, optimising staff training, preparing for operational readiness across and within organisations and change management for a successful Go-Live.- Posted
-
- Electronic Health Record
- Technology
- (and 3 more)
-
Content Article
In this article, Radar Healthcare provides a summary of the main sessions, messages and themes emerging from the Care Show London and the Digital Healthcare Show 2024, which both took place in April 2024. It discusses these topics: Embracing technology in care provision Mastering CQC-ready feedback processes The importance of integration between social care and the NHS Leveraging social media AI: The challenges and opportunities Avoiding digital fatigue: Fostering patient safety In this final section, the article highlights a presentation given by Patient Safety Learning's Chief Executive Helen Hughes and Chief Digital Officer Clive Flashman about the organisation's patient safety standards. They spoke about the standards and accompanying online patient safety assessment toolkit, an easy-to-use resource designed to help organisations establish clearly defined patient safety aims and goals, support their delivery and demonstrate achievement. The article also highlights the contribution of the hub to improving patient safety, saying, "Patient Safety Learning's platform is recognised for its excellence in sharing knowledge on patient safety. It provides a comprehensive suite of tools, resources, case studies, and best practices to support those striving to improve patient care."- Posted
-
- Technology
- Digital health
-
(and 2 more)
Tagged with:
-
Content Article
In 2022 the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) launched the CMS National Quality Strategy (NQS), an ambitious long-term initiative that aims to promote the highest quality outcomes and safest care for all. This document gives an overview of the strategy, using infographics to explain its four priority areas: Outcomes and alignment Equity and engagement Safety and resiliency Interoperability and scientific advancement- Posted
-
- USA
- Quality improvement
- (and 4 more)
-
Content Article
Data federation is a process that uses software to connect many existing systems so that they can function as one. It was recently announced that the contract to develop the NHS Federated Data Platform (FDP).has been awarded to US analytics and AI firm Palantir. This blog explains what the FDP is and what it will do, as well as outlining issues surrounding data privacy that have been raised with the Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England by National Voices and other organisations. -
Content Article
In this video and accompanying transcript, clinical decision support researcher F Perry Wilson looks at the importance of health records and databases indicating whether or not a patient is deceased. If they are not up to date and sharing this information with the right staff and processes, inappropriate messages can be sent to healthcare professionals or the deceased patient's family. He argues that as well as being a waste of resources, sending communications requesting procedures or offering appointments in this situation undermines confidence and trust in health systems, in both staff and members of the public.- Posted
-
- Patient death
- Data
- (and 5 more)
-
News Article
American Hospital Association opposes HHS interoperability rule: 6 things to know
Patient Safety Learning posted a news article in News
The American Hospital Association (AHA) has expressed its opposition to parts of a new HHS interoperability rule aiming to facilitate better healthcare data exchange. The proposed Health Data, Technology, and Interoperability: Patient Engagement, Information Sharing, and Public Health Interoperability rule to "advance interoperability, improve transparency, and support the access, exchange, and use of electronic health information" was published on 5 August. In a letter on 4 October, AHA said it supports parts of the rule: aligning CMS application programming interface requirements and recommendations; continuing to develop U.S. Core Data for Interoperability (USCDI) standards; committing to protect patient data; improving public health data interoperability; rolling out the Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement (TEFCA); and revising information blocking request-response criteria. However, they are concerned that providers would still be held to a higher accountability standard for data sharing, USCDI version deadlines are too aggressive, new encryption requirements are burdensome, and TEFCA's current governance structure may be inadequate." While the AHA supports prior authorisation application programming interface certifications, the group said payers, like providers, should also have mandatory, rather than voluntary, standards to "ensure that protecting the privacy of patient data is prioritized." Read full story Source: Becker's Health IT, 7 October 2024- Posted
-
- Data
- Interoperability
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
Content Article
There is a huge challenge to improve technology adoption and readiness across the NHS. This article in HSJ looks at a partnership between tech services company Agyle and Dorset County Hospital (DCH) which aimed to develop a digital patient record strategy which places user experience at the heart of its approach. DCH's objective was for its staff to access a decreasing number of systems, designed around clinical processes, with data flowing seamlessly between those systems. The article looks at how Agyle and DCH worked together to achieve improved clinical safety, interoperability, cost-effectiveness and future-proofing through their strategy.- Posted
-
- Digital health
- Electronic Health Record
- (and 5 more)
-
Content Article
Research shows that poor handover in hospitals puts patients at risk of severe harm
Anonymous posted an article in Handover
Research undertaken by digital health platform, CAREFUL shows that handover in hospitals is the cause of frequent and severe harm to patients. Handover in hospitals is the cause of frequent and severe harm to patients, according to new research* by digital health platform, CAREFUL. Many patients are suffering because handover is poorly controlled and under-recognised as a source of clinical risk. Handover is the transfer of responsibility and crucial patient information between practitioners and teams. Handover takes place when shifts change and when patients are transferred between departments or outside of the hospital into another care setting. This is a time when staff are under pressure and when mistakes can happen – as the research shows. “We undertook this research because little is known about how practitioners see the risks of handover and the impact of handover on patient safety,” says CAREFUL CEO, Dr DJ Hamblin-Brown. “We anticipated that doctors and nurses would report some errors, but the frequency with which harm is reported across the world is disturbing.” Patient safety in operating theatres has been a recognised problem for many years – ever since the publication of the original checklist article in the New England Journal of Medicine. By contrast, handover, despite being possibly the most common clinical process across healthcare, has not been studied so widely. CAREFUL’s research investigated clinicians’ experience of handover, receiving 432 completed responses from clinicians in 26 countries via an open, anonymous and confidential online questionnaire. Published in February 2022, the findings revealed that errors in handover occur weekly or daily, according to 12% of respondents. Nearly 10% had witnessed severe harm – either death or otherwise life changing – because of handover error. “Handover takes place about 4,000 times each day in a typical teaching hospital”, explains Dr Hamblin-Brown. “It is a procedure prone to a multitude of errors due to reliance on paper that’s easily lost or verbal discussion that’s easily forgotten.” One of the most worrying findings in the research is that most handover takes place using a many different support systems; 35% are still using handwritten notes; 21% are using office documents such as Word and Excel; 10% write on whiteboards and a full 15% are using unofficial messaging apps like WhatsApp. Healthcare leaders reflect the same concerns as staff, but they specifically also want more access to patient information and better electronic systems. Digital platforms may be the only real solution to the challenges surrounding handover, with the ability to provide safe and secure access to handover information at the swipe of a screen that is neither lost nor forgotten. “We work in an industry that is failing to take seriously the dangers of handover. It is arguably the most common, and one of the most important, processes. We harm both staff and patients if we fail to address the dangers of handover,” concludes Dr Hamblin-Brown. *This paper is in pre-print and has not yet been peer-reviewed.- Posted
-
- Handover
- Patient harmed
- (and 12 more)
-
Content Article
This report by the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change looks at how the NHS needs to adapt to meet the demands of the current population. It asks the questions, should we and could we go much further in fundamentally changing the design of how the NHS is run, highlighting two key societal changes that make change necessary: increases in our knowledge of how to stay healthy, and huge technological advances such as artificial intelligence. The report makes the following proposals to the way in which the NHS is organised: We change radically the role of the centre to focus on certain core capabilities that the centre should do and can only do. These would include eventually: a full national public-health data infrastructure, one that is interoperable and capable of bringing all the disparate data sets within the NHS under one roof; electronic personal or health records for all patients with patients given the right to have all their information stored and available to any health-care professional they want anywhere in the NHS system; a revamped NICE, giving guidance on new treatments and drugs; and a process for enabling new learning and sharing of innovation across the service. And of course, the power of intervention in the case of a failing or mismanaged service. Other than for these capabilities, the new integrated care boards, in partnership with clinicians and NHS staff, should have the freedom from central control genuinely to innovate, run the service and manage the budget in the way they see fit to meet the needs of their local patients, which they know best. Going further and faster on devolution is therefore essential. These freedoms should include the ability to enter into partnerships with the private or voluntary sectors, to embrace new methods of treatment and prevention, to create the workforce they believe is best suited to the care they want to provide and to raise money locally through social impact bonds – not as a substitute for taxpayer funding but as a source of better community engagement. In place of a system of accountability based purely on the centre, there should be full transparency and publication of health data, nationally and locally, available to the patient and to the broader public. The NHS should make available – on an anonymised basis – all the data held by the service for the encouragement of research and the development of the British life-sciences sector.- Posted
-
- Organisational development
- Transformation
- (and 5 more)
-
Content Article
PRSB Diabetes standards (July 2022)
Patient-Safety-Learning posted an article in Diabetes
People with diabetes are increasingly using medical devices to help manage their condition, including devices for monitoring glucose and delivering insulin. However, healthcare professionals are finding that they cannot always access up to date information about a person with diabetes and the data from their medical devices. This makes it harder to provide the best advice and support. The Professional Record Standards Body (PRSB) was commissioned by NHS England and NHS Improvement to produce two standards for sharing diabetes information between people and professionals across all care settings, including self management data from digital apps and medical devices (for example, continuous glucose monitors). The Diabetes Information Record Standard which defines the information needed to support a person’s diabetes management. It includes information that could be recorded by health and care professionals or the person themselves that is relevant to the diabetes care of the person and should be shared between different care providers. The Diabetes Self-Management Standard which defines information that could be recorded by the person (or their carer) at home (either using digital apps or medical devices) and shared with health and care professionals. -
Content Article
The number of people on NHS Wales waiting lists for treatment has reached record levels. This problem has worsened since the Covid-19 pandemic, with the average wait time for treatment more than doubling since December 2019. This report by the Welsh Centre for Public Policy identifies five key areas in which policy could be developed to improve outcomes and reduce waiting times. These areas target the underlying factors causing increased waiting times, and are likely to both improve the overall performance of the health system, and to impact outcomes which matter to patients, resulting in a more patient-centred approach: Workforce capacity Digital technology Reimagining primary care Systems collaboration Follow-up care- Posted
-
- Wales
- Long waiting list
- (and 6 more)
-
Content Article
TCC-CASEMIX has created a unique infrastructure to provide total traceability of medical device performance. This infrastructure is supported by The Association of British HealthTech Industries [ABHI]. We refer to it as an 'Open Registry Infrastructure' for medical devices. It is 'open', because unlike existing clinically focused registries, which are 'closed', we enable wide searches across the registries connected into it. It is 'open' because registries will 'declare the content' (I don't know what I don't know, so how can I search for what I don't know?) Access to this infrastructure is through a Data Access Portal which is being configured for the specific needs of each stakeholder group. We are seeking interest from patient groups who would like to join an Advisory Board to help specify how data should be presented to patients in a way that is relevant and meaningful. Our vision is to link this portal into an enhanced pre-operative assessment process, and to transform patient informed consent. We are currently developing the Open Registry infrastructure in South West England, and are bringing together medical device manufacturers (from the world's largest to the smallest) and NHS trusts, with their surgeons that already have relationships with specific manufacturers. Using the system: a patient example Imagine that you are in a consultation with your surgeon, who advises that the mitral valve in your heart needs to be repaired. Your surgeon advises that this procedure can be done with minimally invasive surgery. They recommend using Device-X and you ask, "Why, what evidence do you have that this will work best for me?" Your surgeon replies, "This is the best knowledge that we have." You and your surgeon would then access the Portal. You would search for Device-X, maybe with a specific Unique Device Identification number (UDI) and/or a GMDN code (all of this is presented in a browser to help you search for the correct device). You find from this search that Device-X has been used in patients in three different European countries. You also find that the latest evidence is that it is best suited for patients with large frames, indicating that you may well be better suited to Device-Y. In searching for Device-Y, you also search for the generic description of this device, and find that manufacturers A, D, J and P, all make similar devices of this size, suitable for your needs. Now you search for Adverse Incidents corresponding to Device-Y across all of these manufacturers, and find that there are incidents associated with manufacturers D and P. This enables you and your surgeon to make a better-informed choice about the device that is right for you. How do we acquire medical device data? We have developed a unique capability to acquire data in real-time during surgery, and in association with device manufacturers. Our tech pushes appropriate data into a local registry and this becomes the foundation of data acquisition across Europe. We are already working in Central and Eastern Europe, and are planning a major initiative in Ireland. The Advisory Board comprises: Medical device safety experts Regulatory and Compliance experts Cyber security and data protection experts Patient advocacy experts (unfilled) Notified Bodies (unfilled) The board is chaired by an expert who has been chief executive of two NHS Trusts and worked for NHS England. It is coordinated by a trained anaesthetist and clinical safety expert. The board is also supported by a roundtable of medical device manufacturers, who are committed to making this work happen. They are also committed to total transparency of data. They are funding this work. The support we have been receiving from medical device manufacturers has been astonishing. This is a major opportunity to contribute to patient safety and help transform the patient consent process. If you are interested in finding out more, please contact [email protected]- Posted
-
1
-
- Never event
- Medical device / equipment
- (and 8 more)