From this autumn identifiable extracts from patient records are not only being sent by GP's to the NHS Health and Social Care Information Center, but are also being sold on by that centre to defray costs.
Private companies are being allowed to purchase the information, and although patients can opt-out of the system most patients appear to be unaware that their confidential health notes are being sold, never mind that they can opt-out.
Will this make therapists (of whatever type) who work in the NHS wary of what they write in clients notes?
Whilst I don't agree with them selling the details myself, we need to be clear that it's not a case that any private company can come along and just but the details... it has to be for certain purposes and after they've been vetted (which usually means that they have to be using the data for a particular purpose and not selling it on).
[url]£140 could buy private firms data on NHS patients | Technology | The Guardian[/url]
Of course, the more people have hold of the data, the more likely it is to become 'lost' or 'stolen' due to carelessness.
All Love and Reiki Hugs
There is intense lobbying to reduce the fee, and if the vetting is as good as the vetting used by DVLA who sell to anyone, then that's going to be almost useless. There is already intense pressure on fees covering costs, and I fear that the ability to cover fees will become the most important part of the vetting process.
We have already seen this with the Professional Standards Authority Voluntry Registers Accreditation
From this autumn identifiable extracts from patient records are not only being sent by GP's to the NHS Health and Social Care Information Center, but are also being sold on by that centre to defray costs.
Private companies are being allowed to purchase the information, and although patients can opt-out of the system most patients appear to be unaware that their confidential health notes are being sold, never mind that they can opt-out.
Will this make therapists (of whatever type) who work in the NHS wary of what they write in clients notes?
Something like that is totally against the Caldicott principles and I cannot believe those have been abandoned by the NHS. Are you sure about this ?
Something like that is totally against the Caldicott principles and I cannot believe those have been abandoned by the NHS. Are you sure about this ?
Yes. I'm sure. It has been in most of the newspapers and there is also an article here: (link removed by moderator)
Then this is totally unacceptable. Totally.:eek:
Yes. I'm sure. It has been in most of the newspapers and there is also an article here: (link removed by moderator)
With respect juts because it is in the newspapers doesn't mean it is actually happening. I can believe ANONYMISED data is being sold - but ithat sort of data gets used all the time. Its how we get statistics about patients numbers, diseases, number of prescriptions for different types of medicines etc etc. But patient confidentiality is drummed into anyone who even carries patient notes - and I do not believe Caldicott will be abandoned. It is mandatory to have training in Caldicott that has to be repeated at regular intervals.
This has been widely reported in newspapers during the past fortnight, and several organisations have commented upon it. For example, the following is an extract from a press release last week by an NHS Practice Managers group:
New plans unveiled by NHS England mean that patient data could soon be available to private companies for only £1.
Access to information from patients GP records could be available for as little as £1 if NHS England goes ahead with plans to reduce the cost while increasing the availability of patient data available outside the NHS.
The organisation wants to reduce the cost for companies to access patient information from between £20,000 to £30,000 to £1.
The data would apparently be used to identify where improvements could be made in the NHS and only approved companies would be granted access.
NHS England announced plans to create Care Episode Statistics earlier in the year, in which identifiable data extracted from GP records through the General Practice Extraction Service would be sent to the Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC) and be linked with information from secondary care sources, and will be de-identified, unless the patient has given consent for identifiable data to be shared.
Health secretary Jeremy Hunt announced that patients would have any reasonable objection to having identifiable data sent to the HSCIC noted, and a flag put in their records. They could also object to their data leaving the HSCIC.
The most important parts of the press release are the terms
identifiable data
and
will be de-identified, unless the patient has given consent for identifiable data to be shared.
How efficiently is the second quote going to be implemented? The worry is that in a hard pressed practice people will not have to time to properly 'de-identify' some of the information.
With respect juts because it is in the newspapers doesn't mean it is actually happening. I can believe ANONYMISED data is being sold - but ithat sort of data gets used all the time. Its how we get statistics about patients numbers, diseases, number of prescriptions for different types of medicines etc etc. But patient confidentiality is drummed into anyone who even carries patient notes - and I do not believe Caldicott will be abandoned. It is mandatory to have training in Caldicott that has to be repeated at regular intervals.
Unfortunately, the indications are that it will include postcodes, dates of birth and NHS numbers, which can certainly make people identifiable when linked with other 'public data', making it possible for people with the information to link the health information with the person details obtained elsewhere. That's what's worrying. If it were just anonymous figures/statistics etc. then I wouldn't give two hoots.
OK - so what can be done about it - before it gets off the ground?
OK - so what can be done about it - before it gets off the ground?
Too late!
It was announced (not very loudly) many months ago and starts within a month. The only reason it hit the papers during the past couple of weeks is due to the argument about whose job it is to notify patients that they can opt out.
The government were expecting GP's to notify their patients, and the Information Commissioner has told GP's they have a legal obligation to tell all of their patients individually with all the extra expense for practices that entails.
GP's have been pressing for the government themselves to have a big publicity campaign, TV, radio, press, etc. and for the government themselves to take responsibility.
The end result is that to-date there has been negligible publicity at all and it's due to commence in a few weeks.
😮 :speechless-smiley-0
I prefer not to bury myself in the papers, but sometimes it is necessary to find out what the government (and anyone else) is up to. 😡