- Trust: University Hospitals of Bristol NHS Foundation Trust
- Trust: Gateshead Health NHS Foundation Trust
- Supplier: System C
- Supplier: McKesson
University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust has gone live with its Medway patient administration system and electronic patient record.
The trust was due to go live with the system over the weekend, and has confirmed to EHI that it has done so. The trust is understood to have taken large scale approach to the go-live, and to have a significant proportion of its staff live with the system already.
The trust selected System C to provide it with a new PAS and EPR in May last year, signing a seven year contract with the company.
It has also purchased Medway departmental systems for A&E, maternity and theatres, a clinical data collection module, and a data warehouse and reporting system, Medway Business Intelligence.
System C’s portal product, Medway Connect, will be used to integrate a range of third party and trust-developed applications, including Medicode and Sunquest ICE.
When the trust selected the system, Stephen Hann, clinical systems programme director for the trust, said it had chosen Medway because it was a “modern system, built specifically for the NHS” and one that would allow it to deliver a “step change” in PAS and clinical functionality for staff.
The Bristol deal was also an important win for System C, which has been awarded a similar deal by Gateshead Health NHS Foundation Trust, which is due to go live in June.
© 2012 EHealth Media.
Wow! very wecome Friday goodwill to all...Jon Hoeksma 116 weeks ago
Not sure if its Friday, the week of rain, something in the air at Uni Bristol but this implementation of Medway has led to an outpouring of good feelings and neighbourly warmth, admiration and harmony not always evident on the comments pages of EHI. And very welcome it is to.
So hearty congrats to Uni hospitals Bristol staff Mckesson, System C folk, fellow suppliers and all concerned or just in generous mood for giving us news story that has led to such positive feelings. Well done everyone...
Congratulations to UHB and from one supplier to anotherShane Tickell 116 weeks ago
As a CEO of an EPR solution that is also NHS ready, I want to add my compliments to UHB and the System C team. It is really good for the industry and our NHS colleagues to see success stories and on behalf of IMS MAXIMS I congratulate you all and look forward to further good news that conveys there are good applicable solutions, with good implementation capability from home grown teams and products.
My sincere best wishes to you all.
Another South Western RHA/Swift/EDS/HP site moves onstan 10 116 weeks ago
As an old stager I remember the "one system, take it when you are ready" strategy of the old South Western RHA and regional computer centre. The main plus was the shared community and joint development of requirements then in the region. With RHA changes and new policies the Regional Computer Centre and systems were bought out by EDS in the mid 1990s and the EDS was bought iteself by HP. The community facilitated by the South West RHA (merger of South Western and Wessex) were close to a reprocurement through the Shires consortium which was then blown out of the water at final business case stage by the emergence of NPfIT. So telling now to see a number of different strategic systems deployed in the patch:
Cerner: Weston, Taunton, North Bristol
System C: UHB, Royal Devon & Exeter
It will be interesting to see whether Yeovil currently out to tender links with one of these groups or extends the mix further.
And as far as I know North Devon, South Devon and Royal Cornwall still have core systems from HP.
So overall a patch demonstrating a move from "standardisation" (RHA and NPfIT) to Competitive Marketplace over a generation.
Congratulations to the Uhbristol team!Neo 116 weeks ago
It's a rare (possibly unheard of) thing to see one of these implementations delivered to quite the standard that seems to have been achieved at UHBristol.
The lessons learned from Bristol should make interesting reading indeed. Whilst the apparent success of this delivery is to be applauded, we still need to learn about the areas that could have been improved...sharing is caring!
Thumbs up from a cliniciandrjshaw 116 weeks ago
I am an A&E doctor working at UHB and also worked at North Bristol during the Cerner go live.
Its early days but I have to say that I have been extremely impressed with the Medway roll-out at UHB. The hospital implementation team were extremely well prepared after months of planning, countless dress rehearsals and worked hard to ensure clinical staff were trained. The data migration process must have been an epic task and the result was pretty smooth considering.
Medway itself seems to be a nice system with a modern, intuitive UI and easier to use than Cerner. Adoption of EMRs is going to be challenging amongst clinicians as it undoubtedly slows down a clinician's ability to deliver care but I firmly believe this is outweighed by the long term benefits of providing better, safer and data driven care.
Vendor Neutral Clinical Portal--XDS consumerNeelam Dugar 116 weeks ago
Approximately 70-100 vendors have tested for XDS consumer compliance in IHE global connectathons. NHS customers need to demand for vendor neutrality. Vendor commercial interests currently are NOT with unlocked vendor neutral data. But the market will mature. When they are unable to sell products unless XDS/XDR compliant (this was how DICOM came about--initially there was scaremongering, then provided at a cost, and then was part of solution as customers would not buy non-DICOM products.
I remain positive & optimistic for NHS.
Stephen HannLyn from eHealth Insider 116 weeks ago
Since posting this story, eHealth Insider has been informed that Stephen Hann passed away last year.
A reader involved in the Bristol project described Steve as "a great bloke" with a "can-do attitude" that set the tone for its success. They also said his death was "a great tragedy for his family and for everyone that worked with and knew him."
Stephen HannPeteMarsh 116 weeks ago
I too want to add my celebration of Steve's life and abilities. I worked on the Wirral vision with Steve at Cerner for a long time and the coexistence strategy with the legacy Wirral PCIS EPR was borne out of a lot of time spent in "smoke filled rooms" (well not really but sounds like what it felt like). Later when he eventually ended up in Bristol, I was about to visit after his surgery and got the rather sudden bad news, that we had lost a very capable Clinical IT guy with vision. As a person he was top notch and wonderful to enjoy a pint with after the long days of design work. My thoughts to his family and friends. Pete
Stephen Hannsdeviney 116 weeks ago
Stephen was indeed a wonderful man, whose passing on December 5 was a great loss. I hired him sight-unseen in 2001 based on nothing more than a phone call with him. Many congratulations to the team at UH Bristol. Your work is a fitting tribute to Stephen's vision and commitment to ensuring the best possible care using information technology as an enabling tool. Thank you!
Exit Strategy & Vendor Neutral Clinical PortalNeelam Dugar 116 weeks ago
I hope they have agreed an exit strategy.
I hope they have insisted their clinical portal is vendor neutral (XDS consumer compliant).
Otherwise, 7 years later they will have trouble.
Plea from the well of ignorancemrtablet 116 weeks ago
I think most EHI readers are aware of and acknowledge achievements in the exchange of pictures (e.g. radiology images) between systems from different vendors. This is a hard won intellectual and logistic triumph - in essence the transfer of image files plus thin and readily converged metadata with shared and highly constrained uses for the data at either end of the exchange.
However many EHI readers work in areas such as enterprise scheduling, clinical coding, order communications, LIMS, care pathway management, decision support, medicines management, clinical performance and patient outcomes reporting etc.
The data underlying these might be packaged within XDS - but this isn't the transmission of 'blobs'. Within the XDS wrapper remain the persistent issues of divergent data models, coding systems, uses cases, data standards, terminology bindings, version control etc.
So can you please remind us which secondary care systems available in the UK market seamlessly exchange generic machine readable electronic records containing these kinds of data with systems from other vendors.
Caveat - no acronyms, connectathon demos, marketing puff, promising academic research etc: just the names of two EHR suppliers operating in the UK who can deploy hospital systems NOW which fit these criteria.
Otherwise "XDS consumer compliance" helps less than the universal vendor assurance "we can dump delimited text files from our database tables"
My thoughts too, largelyAdeByrne 116 weeks ago
The good news is that system C products are largely modular, meaning it is possible to migrate into and away from them incrementally. I think that is the case anyway, as they will co-exist with other OCS for example.
The big problems on exit come with all in one big bang projects. Both will ultimately need similar solutions for exit and these should use the available standards. Talking with VNA vendors right now about EPR however yields nothing more than a conversation about the art of the possible.
What trusts should start to think about though is where is the data in the new system, do they own it, and can they get enough of it into an independent place whereby they can a)use it operationally for other purposes and b)roll on past the end of contract without needing any [or much] of the data that was in the "black box". Think about what the system needs to run itself versus what you might need out of it in terms of a patient and audit record. For now this second set could be replicated into a clinical data repository. None of this will be easy of course and I agree that at the moment it is somewhat fanciful.