The NHS Commissioning Board will require every GP to provide a “standardised routine set of data” to help assess their quality and it will be published online.
NHS CB national director of patients and information Tim Kelsey announced the plans to attendees at a Digital by Default conference in London this week.
He said the commissioning board will be requiring every primary care clinician to provide it with a “standardised routine set of data to learn more about their quality” and where the board can assist if standards are not good enough.
He used the example that currently about 2,000 people a year die because they have been prescribed anti-psychotic drugs when they have dementia.
“That’s bad practice bordering on negligence and at the moment we can’t tell which GPs are doing it,” he said.
He envisioned a future where that kind of information would be available online.
“At the moment we have not got transparency in any part of our health service. There’s no meaningful data on primary care, mental health, child services. It’s pretty much not available, but it does largely exist and we need to get the data liberated,” he explained.
“This is about the tools for a new health service. The commissioning board is based on two operating principles - transparency and participation – and in both cases we are deadly serious.”
Kelsey said the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust inquiry, about which people will be hearing in the “next few weeks”, shows the importance of transparency in the health service.
“Data transparency is literally about life and death.
“It will be quite shocking that the NHS is now truly going to embrace the open data and transparency movement,” he added.
Kelsey also told the conference that his reference to a “paperless NHS by 2015” meant paperless referrals. This will be achieved through the re-launch of Choose and Book which he hoped would transform the way clinicians and patients engage with the health service.
He said he wants to rid hospital wards of “treasury tags and rubber bands” used to hold together piles of patient notes and start relying on a digital-based health service.
© 2012 EHealth Media.
Already knowndyfthegog 101 weeks ago
The PCT or LHB already have masses of 'quality' data relating to QOF. These range from what percentage of patients with heart failure are on certain drugs to the precentage of asthmatic children 14-19 smoke. The mass of information is already there and available to anyone who wants to look. Try http://www.gpcontract.co uk to see what is recorded and how it can be referenced already. This is the usual government tripe and recycled news.
The point about antipsychotics in the demented is well made by others in that these are starrted, in the main, by secondary care doctors with instructions for the GP to continue prescribing. How is that going to be assessed?
Quality???Infoman 101 weeks ago
My reference to good practice was not specifically in the quality sense but rather in the consumer context of "good" i.e. good GP practices as implied by the "good" hospital guide.
I'm not up to speed with the detail of the Mid Staffs findings but my understanding of the information elements from reading the oral transcripts was that the national comparative data produced by various organisations (not to be named here) clearly showed significant variation in outcomes at Mid Staffs which the subsequent investigation concluded had resulted in a significant number of avoidable deaths.
So I would have to disagree. The national data clearly showed that something different was occuring at Mid Staffs. It was the management response to this intelligence that appears to have been wanting.
DittoCertaCitrus 101 weeks ago
I was quoting 'putting the patients first'
"Organisations are still judged less by how effectively they treat patients, and more by performance against central priorities and standards."
"For an example of this, we need look no further than Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust, which was rated as ‘good’ on quality of service by the Healthcare Commission in 2008 despite running a standardised mortality rate significantly higher than comparable hospitals."
The "Good Practice" GuideInfoman 101 weeks ago
I suspect the transparency (open data) objective is to facilitate in primary care the same type of national data that facilitates the production of things like Dr Foster's Good Hospital Guide.
To acheive this you need access to data collected centrally to a common standard by the state (as per the commissioning data sets) and released at little or no cost to the private sector.
Geepsi's practice, as I suspect do most others, publish lots of good local information but its just not feasible for a non-state organisation to trawl every practice web site and capture this data without incurring significant cost.
Geepsi's data come from national datasets..Mary Hawking 101 weeks ago
The antipsychotic prescribing data - and, indded, most of the data in PCT dashboards - come from already existing - and available - national datasets, mashed by PCTs routinely.
I'm just not clear what other datasets are needed for primary care.
You already have Patient Satisfaction surveys (part of QOF): prescribing data - or at any rate, dispensed prescription data: QOF : referral, HES and A&E data.
So what Datasets are you considering?
insert "NOT" before paperlessPaul Cundy 101 weeks ago
he misstweeted omitting the word "referrals" before paperless, so it will be 100% paperless referrals. This will be acheived by using Choose and Book. Anyone whos ever actually done a Choose and Book referral will know that it is not paperless. You have to print out the password notice for the patient and then separately the appointment or authorisation details - this usually runs to 3 sides of A4. A traditional referral is at worst a letter and an envelope, at best paperless between NHS Mail accounts.
100% use of Choose and Book, if acheivable, will result in more trees being cut down not less.
To make it paperless you'll need to hook it into the patient's mobile phone / facebook / PDA / etc.
Is this planned?
A fair point....howeverin arduis fidelis 101 weeks ago
I agree "paperless" is not accurate, "paperlight" would have been a more appropriate choice of words. As to more trees that is not entirely true. Whilst it is true that an appointment summary and password (if it is the patients first referral through the system bearing in mind that the password never changes unless they change it) may be printed out. Since the C&B "referral" sent to the provider is electronic (and hopefully more than a "letter" to provide enough clinical history to ensure the appropriateness of the referral) this starts the ball rolling at source for Providers to move away from paper, and since the patient already has their appointment details there is no requirement for the Provider to send out appointment letters to the patient. Additionally take in to account that if the referral is inappropriate or the patient DNAs the notification to the patients GP is also done electronically through C&B, a further removal of paper. So true whilst not yet completely "paperless" (and additions such as you have suggested would be definite improvements, although there are ways to work those in now with a little innovation, are more realistic if the reprocuremnt of C&B next year allows for open source) definitely "paperlight"
Parallel UniverseGeepsi 102 weeks ago
I sometimes think that senior figures like TK inhabit a parallel universe to the one that those of us at the coalface inhabit.
Not only is my practice's antipsychotic prescribing known but it makes up part of its scorecard which is published and available form the front page of my PCT website. The scorecard also shows QOF achievement and patient satisfaction scores.
You can also go to most practice websites and see the results of the patient surveys carried out by the patient participation groups.
The data for most of the things he announced is already out there either in the public domain or available to the Commissioning Board . However, that would not be as exciting as announcing yet more new systems to keep the politicians happy and the crowd placated with bread and circuses.
A little learning is...JacquesOuze 102 weeks ago
In answer to Mary's earlier rhetorical question, no, he obviously understands very little about the NHS or the benefits and limitations of technology in such a complex environment.
But he doesn't need to, because he's bought into the cyber-utopian theories of people like Clay Shirky that underpin US initiatives like 311; ideas that intellectual featherweights like Douglas Carswell MP have lapped up and regurgitated in UK friendly form.
Most of these ideas start with a grain of truth, then extrapolate wildly into all sorts of self-serving fantasies, but the benefits of freeing up information and using technology to disrupt the status quo and change things for the better is a kind of article of faith.
I think he's a believer, it's just that his belief derives from social media groupthink rather than anything more substantial.
Another non-sequitor..Mary Hawking 102 weeks ago
"Kelsey also told the conference that his reference to a %u21Cpaperless NHS by 2015%u21D meant paperless referrals. This will be achieved through the re-launch of Choose and Book which he hoped would transform the way clinicians and patients engage with the health service.
He said he wants to rid hospital wards of %u21Ctreasury tags and rubber bands%u21D used to hold together piles of patient notes and start relying on a digital-based health service."
How will 100% electronic referrals remove those *essential* *paper* tools - treasury tags and rubber bands?
If the objective is no longer abolition of paper in the NHS, isn't it a bit early to remove dependence on physical means of managing paper?
Oh dear: just noticed "re-launch of C&B" - hope this relaunch will improve the system - and I have forgotten how many times it has been relaunched already! ;->