PCT claims "disaster" upload of summary care records was a success

                             – Upload of medical records slows down a GP Practice’s systems

                             – Some patients did not receive summary care record information packs

                             – GP brands upload of SCRs a “disaster”

                             – Local primary care trust says uploads were a success

A GP says the uploading of summary care records has been a disaster for her practice, reports E-Health Insider.

Dr Linda Parker is a principal at one of four GP practices based at Roebuck House in Hastings, East Sussex, which have begun uploading records over the last few weeks.

She said the upload had been “a complete disaster for the practice” with large numbers of patients reporting no knowledge of the Public Information Programme.

She said: “I have had a lot of patients saying they haven’t received a letter when I have asked them about it and none of my own neighbours has received a letter.”

Dr Parker also said the upload had resulted in a significant slowdown inthe practice’s iSoft clinical system.

“It keeps locking me outof the entire system. We were told it would be working in thebackground, which it isn’t,” she said.

“It asks me if I want toupload something every time I make changes, which is not convenient inthe middle of surgery. In the end I’ve even resorted to taking mysmartcard out – which isn’t ideal.”

But a spokesperson for NHSHastings and Rother said that:

              –  the upload ofrecords from Dr Parker’s practice had been a success

            –  feedback from her practice had been good

             –  thenumber of patients not receiving information packs was no higher thanelsewhere

            –  the number of patients opting out hadnot been high

            –  only a small number of patients atDr Parker’s practice had contacted the Summary Care Records careline



Thedefensiveness of the primary care trust shows how politics infuses thesummary care records scheme.

It is easy to dismiss criticisms ofthe summary care records by saying that complaints are no higher thanelsewhere – does this mean the complaints are unjustified?

It isalso odd that the PCT would know how many patients have not receivedinformation packs. How could the spokesperson know that the number notreceiving them was no higher than elsewhere?

And when the PCTsays that the number of patients opting out is “not high”,  it is being atouch disingenuous. PCTs are mailing summary care records informationpacks to tens of millions of patients. So even if hundreds of thousandsopt out of an SCR officials could still say this number wasn’t high, relative to 30 million mail-outs.

IT inthe NHS works when all involved see the advantage. Few will believe thesuccess that comes from the mouth of a PCT spokesperson, especially whenthat person has a story to convey, whatever the facts.

SummaryCare Records are a good idea in principle. But the draftUniversity College London report shows that the scheme hasn’t beenthought through.

Ploughing ahead with SCR uploads before the UCLreport’s concerns are discussed is premature. The UCL SCR report – which was commissioned by NHS Connecting for Health – hasn’t evenbeen published.


GPbrands SCR up-load a disaster – E-Health Insider

Confidentialreport on summary care records finds database is inaccurate – ITProjects Blog

National Programme for IT faces and uncertain future – v3.co.uk

PCTs look to press ahead with SCR uploads  – E-Health Insider