THE rollout of a new computer system to every London hospital has been frozen after being installed in just one organisation. IT experts have stopped setting up the software across the capital and have rushed to sort out problems caused by the system at the Royal Free Hampstead NHS trust the only acute hospital to have installed it so far.
It is the latest blow for the £12billion national programme, designed to give doctors access to patients' records wherever they are in the country. The system has been beset with software glitches and design faults. One internal health service document said it could put seriously ill patients at risk of being inaccurately diagnosed.
According to the document, it is routinely crashing, intermittently losing patient information, and some staff are reverting to pen and paper. There have already been reports that implementation of the system nationwide has virtually ground to a halt. The project is already four years late. So far the Royal Free is the only trust to have installed the latest "London Configuration 1" software.
It links to the NHS "spine" that stores patient information. To protect patient confidentiality users must swipe an electronic card to access the data. Kay Fletcher, spokeswoman for the London Programme for IT, which is responsible for the upgrade of NHS computers, said: "We want to learn from the issues at the Royal Free before rolling it out."
Ms Fletcher admitted no more hospitals would get the upgrade until next year. Four trusts Kingston, Queen Mary's Roehampton, St George's in Tooting, and Imperial Healthcare in west London, were expected to be next in line for the new system.
Ms Fletcher said: "The trusts are continuing with their preparations but we are discussing revised golive dates. We have Christmas coming up and we wouldn't want a trust to go live at that time and January is also very busy."
A spokeswoman for the Royal Free said: "Although the implementation initially went better than we expected, there are some problems with the system. As a result, a programme was set up in early October with the local service provider, BT; the London Programme for Information Technology; and the system supplier, Cerner UK, to address these issues."
It is the latest blow for the £12billion national programme, designed to give doctors access to patients' records wherever they are in the country. The system has been beset with software glitches and design faults. One internal health service document said it could put seriously ill patients at risk of being inaccurately diagnosed.
According to the document, it is routinely crashing, intermittently losing patient information, and some staff are reverting to pen and paper. There have already been reports that implementation of the system nationwide has virtually ground to a halt. The project is already four years late. So far the Royal Free is the only trust to have installed the latest "London Configuration 1" software.
It links to the NHS "spine" that stores patient information. To protect patient confidentiality users must swipe an electronic card to access the data. Kay Fletcher, spokeswoman for the London Programme for IT, which is responsible for the upgrade of NHS computers, said: "We want to learn from the issues at the Royal Free before rolling it out."
Ms Fletcher admitted no more hospitals would get the upgrade until next year. Four trusts Kingston, Queen Mary's Roehampton, St George's in Tooting, and Imperial Healthcare in west London, were expected to be next in line for the new system.
Ms Fletcher said: "The trusts are continuing with their preparations but we are discussing revised golive dates. We have Christmas coming up and we wouldn't want a trust to go live at that time and January is also very busy."
A spokeswoman for the Royal Free said: "Although the implementation initially went better than we expected, there are some problems with the system. As a result, a programme was set up in early October with the local service provider, BT; the London Programme for Information Technology; and the system supplier, Cerner UK, to address these issues."
Source: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard
1 comment:
Some comments about this project..
Sorry if this sounds like self interest, but I work for a company in Israel. We have already developed the tech. We have proven concept that none / most of these glitches do not occur for us.
In Germany today, they are considering a EU 0.6 billion investment for something similar, or our product for 1% of the cost.
- Michael Horesh, Jerusalem, Israel
Don't go blaming the IT experts, many of them have written private and open letters to their MPs about the crass handling of this project.
There are several blogs and bulletin boards full of comments on the craziness that is going on. These go back years and are a fun read, fun as in 'watching a car crash in slow motion, glad it's not me' kind of way.
Due to the government's purposeful inaction on the points raised, many IT experts are of the opinion that in reality this whole project is but a way to pass large sums of tax payers money to party donors.
- Threaded, Roskilde, Denmark
It surely couldn't be another EDS sponsored debacle could it?
- Michael Murphy, brightlingsea england
Had the government retained the DH civil servants that had to leave the Department of Health during the infamous change program they might have have the benefit of people who knew how the NHS and government departments work.
Instead they let staff go and then brought in private contract staff who had no background knowledge of what the IT program was based on.
- Melvyn, Canvey Island, Essex
The purpose of the NHS IT programme is not to make patient records easier to access; its purpose is to enrich Labour donors. PFI is fraudulent, dishonest and corrupt.
- Neil, london uk, Airstrip ONE .
don't blame the 'experts'. Most of them have very little say in what is going to be done. The decisions were taken by politicians and Civil servants. Experts are only listened to when it fails. When I workd at St Thomas' ll the meetings were between managers of the hospital and the suppliers. The IT department was never included - I left after saying I didn't want to be involved in sucha a disaster
- Lee, london
"IT experts" - obviously not very "expert" are they, if they have only managed to mess up one installation so far? Maybe next time they will employ people who know what they are doing, instead of consultants in hock to the government.
- Nobby Clark, Perth, Scotland
There's no earthly reason why doctors should have everyone's medical records on tap wherever they are in the country. (and if they're abroad and ill ??)
A simple e-mail to the relevant Regional Health Authority should be all that's necessary to get a particular patient's record.
Recording patients on a Regional, or even GP practice basis rather than Nationwide is much more secure, achievable and hugely cheaper, with Regional benefits.
Most patients seldom venture out of their Region, so there's little reason to have a Nationwide database accessible nationwide. (by whom???)
- Cap, London,UK
"We want to learn from the issues at the Royal Free before rolling it out."
It is a bit late to learn. The problem revolves around an unclear understanding of the requirements. A hospital consultant told me that he and his colleagues were never asked what they wanted from the system. Another fine mess a large government IT project has got into!
- Michael, London
PFI is legalised theft.
- Neil, london uk, Airstrip ONE .
Post a Comment