- News Home
- UK
- World
- Society
- Politics
- Business & Money
- Science & Technology
- Sport
- Arts & Entertainment
- Weather
NHS multimillion pound IT: the risks
Last Modified: 20 Feb 2008
By:
Julian Rush
Exclusive: It's costing millions but the new NHS computer system in London and southern England poses a risk to patients say some consultants.
The new NHS IT system is causing serious concern among clinicians.
Last summer, the then boss of the National Health Service IT system, Richard Granger, candidly admitted he was "ashamed" - saying some of the hospital software was "appalling".
Seven months on, Channel 4 News has spoken to clinicians who are seriously concerned about the system.
NHS bosses insist the software being installed in hospitals to manage all the information on every patient who walks through the door will bring huge benefits.
It's a key part of the £12bn NHS computer project, Connecting for Health.
With electronic medical records and on-line scheduling of treatment and tests, it's meant to save time and improve efficiency.
But the reality for some has been rather different.
So if you are asking me whether it puts patients at risk? Yes, it does
Consultant Chris Taylor
Consultants we have talked to in a number of trusts paint a disturbing picture. They talk of repeated delays in getting the system up and running. And far from making things more efficient, they say that hundred of thousands of pounds have had to be spent to employ extra staff to make it work.
In one hospital they have had to abandon many of the system's functions because they believe it could be putting patients at risk.
In southern England and London, the NHS is buying and modifying off-the-shelf software from the US company, Cerner.
The new patient information system has already been introduced into 13 hospitals across London and the south. It has not impressed some consultants who've used it.
Chris Taylor decided to speak out because of her experience in one hospital.
She concluded patients might be at risk after she found the system couldn't do simple things like print labels for blood samples quickly.
She said: "It happened on more than one occasion; I was walking around the department with a handful of blood samples in my hand afraid of putting them down because I didn't want to get them mixed up with the samples that others had in their hands which were equally unlabelled because the system couldn't cope.
"So if you are asking me whether it puts patients at risk? Yes, it does, because sometimes you must not delay treatment."
We put her concerns to Connecting for Health's national clinical director for the new hospital system, who is himself an accident and emergency consultant at a London hospital.
Dr Eccles said: "Well that needs to be investigated and interestingly has not been escalated. I am unaware of that.
"We do have a very clear escalation policy for any issue that offers risk to patients. It is unacceptable to leave patients at risk and we don't do so."
Cerner, who makes the software, told us: "The Cerner Millennium solution has passed all...testing and assurance requirements."
As for speed, Cerner said it had conducted performance tests with satisfactory results.
Another trust where the Cerner system has run into trouble is at the Royal Free Hospital in north London. The system was due to be up and running at Easter - that's next month - but at the end of January the chief executive wrote to all staff in an email that start-up had been delayed until May.
He said: "The trust was not prepared to accept a system that is not yet demonstrated to be fit for purpose."
It is unacceptable to leave patients at risk and we don't do so.
National clinical director for the new hospital system, Dr Eccles
The Royal Free says the delay is frustrating, but not uncommon for programmes of this scale and complexity.
They told us it was caused by the need for more testing of computer programs that provide extra clinical functions beyond the basic patient administration system.
For some hospitals, too, the new system has led to extra costs.
In just three of the 13 trusts with it - Taunton, Worthing, and Winchester - extra staff and other costs add up to around £1m.
The pressure is now on Connecting for Health to show that IT in the NHS brings real benefits. But the opinions of some doctors who've experienced the systems are making that difficult.
Chris Taylor added: "Given that the system has been in some form implemented in hospitals for over a year and that there have been entire consultant groups who have raised their concerns, almost protests, it is beyond comprehension that this system, in its current form, is now being implemented. It just really is beyond comprehension. I have no other word for that."
The stakes, then, couldn't be higher for the future of the NHS IT programme. Because unless the problems with the new hospital system are resolved soon, the chance of realising genuine longer term benefits of IT in the NHS could be in jeopardy.









