The biggest-ever government IT outsourcing project was plunged into chaos
yesterday as Lockheed Martin dramatically pulled out of the race to supply up to
£10 billion of computer systems to the National Health Service. Conal Walsh
Sunday August 31, 2003 The Observer
The new computer system being installed by the NHS is set to cost taxpayers
at least £15bn over the next 10 years - more than the total investment in the
Channel tunnel. The eventual price tag may reach £30bn, five times the
procurement costs announced two years ago by the former health secretary, Alan
Milburn, the Department of Health said last night. John Carvel, social affairs
editor
Tuesday October 12, 2004 The Guardian
As many as 3,000 babies and toddlers may have gone without crucial
vaccinations because a privatised NHS computer system has failed to monitor
which children are due for jabs and whether they have received them. Jo
Revill, health editor
Sunday February 26, 2006 The Observer
Health chiefs have denied that problems with a new privately-run computer
system would cause thousands of babies and young children to miss crucial
vaccinations.
Sunday
February 26, 2006 8:18 AM
NHS's £6bn IT
programme 'in need of significant changes'. Richard Jeavons, the man charged
with implementing the NHS IT programme, has said it needs "a new operating
model" and is being "refreshed" in the light of government policy changes since
its launch in 2002. The government has moved to introduce a supplier market,
bringing in private sector operators, competition,
foundation trusts and
patient choice and there are
"significant changes arising from that". 'Choose and book' should have been in
widespread use by last December but the target for full implementation has now
moved well into next year. Patricia Hewitt has said that even by August only 1m
of the 13m first outpatient appointments made annually will have gone through
the system. Sir John Bourn, head of the National Audit Office, said the
programme has become "a focus of dissension" within the NHS.
Summary by Keep our NHS Public
of
Financial Times 21 March 2006
Computer experts have written to MPs calling for an independent review of
the NHS's £6.2 billion IT scheme. The National Programme for IT (NPfIT) will
link more than 30,000 GPs in England to almost 300 hospitals by 2012. It
involves an
online booking system, a
centralised medical records system for 50 million patients, e-prescriptions and
fast computer network links between NHS organisations.
Tuesday
April 11, 2006 7:38 AM
MPs to probe IT
fiasco at health service. The public accounts committee is to investigate
the National Health Service's £6.2bn IT modernisation amid fears that the
massive project is overbudget and behind schedule. Connecting for Health,
launched by Tony Blair four years ago, involves centralised medical records
for 50 million patients, prescriptions by email and online booking. Although
much of the overhaul is funded by the government, hospitals are obliged to
bear the cost of upgrading local networks, inputting patient data, and
training staff to use the systems. Only a minority of hospitals are thought to
have completed this so far.
Summary by Keep our NHS Public
of
Observer 7 May 2006
Plans for NHS
files are late by two years. Plans to give all 50m NHS patients in England
a full electronic medical record are running at least two to two-and-a-half
years late, Lord Warner, the health minister who oversees the project, has
confirmed. He also admitted that the full cost of the programme was likely to
be nearer £20bn than the widely quoted figure of £6.2bn. The latter figure
covered only the national contracts for the systems' basic infrastructure and
software applications. The delays to the electronic care record, which mean it
may not be in place until early 2008, come in part because of delays in
providing the software, which is being developed by iSoft and other companies.
Summary by Keep our NHS Public
of
Financial Times 30 May 2006
NHS scheme
'risk to confidentiality'. The British Medical Association has raised
concerns about the new multibillion-pound NHS computer system. The BMA has
told the Government not to presume patient consent as planned, but attain
consent before records are put on to the database; a move which would delay
the system by a further two and a half years. The government has argued that
the recommendation would add to doctors' already bulging workload with the
Department of Health stating that "the NHS program is one of the largest IT
projects in the world…As with any large, complex program there will be
difficulties."
Summary by Keep our NHS Public
of
Times 31 May 2006
NHS to focus on
getting IT project right. Officials in charge of an embattled multibillion
pound health service IT project will ignore deadlines for its completion and
concentrate on ensuring the new systems work correctly. Connecting for Health
has admitted it is now running two and a half years late. The total costs of
the project are now likely to be almost £20bn, compared with the official
figure of £6.2bn.
Summary by Keep our NHS Public
of
Public Finance 2 June 2006
Electronic
records and NHS reform. A Financial Times leader says that what threatens
the NHS IT programme at least as much as the technical problems and delays is
the fundamental disagreement within the medical profession over how patient
data will be uploaded and what the summary record will contain.
Summary by Keep our NHS Public
of
Financial Times 2 June 2006
NHS trusts pay
millions in fines to suppliers of delayed IT systems. NHS trusts are being
made to pay multimillion-pound penalties to computer suppliers because of a
clause in contracts for the health service's £20bn IT scheme. The government
committed trusts to provide 200 staff to work with the computer companies to
devise the best possible systems. In southern England the NHS was unable to
meet an obligation to second 50 full-time employees to the Japanese-owned
Fujitsu Corporation. The trusts will now have to pay Fujitsu £19m. Tory MP
Richard Bacon, a member of the Commons public accounts committee, discovered
the fines against NHS trusts. He found that trusts in north-west England and
the West Midlands were committed to provide 50 IT staff to work with the US
company CSC. They face potential penalties of up to £6.9m a year for 10 years.
Summary by Keep our NHS Public
of
Guardian 6 June 2006
Health service
IT contracter in crisis. One of the software firms working on the NHS's
£6.2bn IT upgrade yesterday said it had to change the way it accounts for its
revenues, knocking a huge hole in its profits. The move has forced iSoft to
cut 15% of staff, sell non-core assets, renegotiate its overdraft, and
consider wiping £500m off the value of a business now valued at only £117.3m
by the City, less than when it floated six years ago.
Summary by Keep our NHS Public
of Guardian 9 June 2006
NHS risks £20bn
white elephant, say auditors. The government's £20bn investment in new IT
systems for the NHS in England could turn into a white elephant unless
ministers work harder to involve doctors in developing it, according to the
National Audit Office. The NAO says the scheme is two years behind schedule,
but has not run over budget like other jumbo computer schemes.
Summary by Keep our NHS Public
of Guardian
16 June 2006
Choose and book target postponed. The department of health has put off
the deadline for its targets on using choose and book, but at the same time
has doubled the requirements for when it is enacted. If GPs do not meet the
new target of 50% of referrals using the system by the revised date of
September 2007, then they will have to pay back 'aspiration' money at an
average of £1,320 per practise. This news comes as the National Audit Office
gave a more positive than expected report on the
National IT programme, referring
to "substantial progress."
Summary by Keep our NHS Public
of Health
Service Journal 22 June 2006
The multi-billion pound computer system built to run NHS patient records
is experiencing so many problems that there are concerns people could be put
at 'clinical risk', with missed appointments and lost records meaning that
some hospitals have pulled out of the scheme in despair. Jamie Doward, home
affairs editor
Sunday June 25, 2006 The Observer[The
new system has been blamed for delays by some hospitals: the Nuffield
Orthopaedic Centre in
Oxford has already experienced problems printing letters which have led to
delayed appointments.]
NHS computer
officials accused. Senior officials in charge of the new multi-billion
pound computer system for the NHS have been criticised by former advisors for
ignoring the advice of medical staff, and in doing so choosing the wrong
product. Professor Peter Hutton, former chief medical advisor to the project,
described the contracting process as a "juggernaut". Ten days after voicing
his concerns to then NHS chief executive, Hutton was asked to stand down from
the advisory body he headed. Another advisor involved in the project, Anthony
Nowlan, a Department of Health official at the time, said he felt
"increasingly compromised" as he was asked to exaggerate the extent of
consultation with clinical staff. The IT programme's director, Richard
Granger, dismissed claims that clinical consultation had been inadequate and
said that he had been determined to end the department's "pilot-itis". Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Financial
Times 27 June 2006
The future of iSoft, one of the key software suppliers in the government's
£6.2bn upgrade of NHS IT systems, was thrown into doubt today as the company
delayed publishing its annual results because it was still locked in crucial
financing talks with its banks. Richard Wray
Friday July 7, 2006 Guardian Unlimited
NHS loses track
of children's jabs. A glitch in new NHS computer software has led to the
possibility of thousands of children not being immunised against diseases such
as measles, whooping cough or diphtheria. More than 50,000 children have not
had their details entered onto the system to monitor their vaccination status,
making it almost impossible to track anyone who may have missed out on jabs.
The system, which covers 10 of the capital's 31 care trusts, is called "the
child interim application" and is part of the multi-billion pound plans to
over-haul the NHS computer system. The agency stressed that the children were
"not necessarily unvaccinated". It did however report "worrying" figures of
falling coverage in the two trusts affected, adding that many trusts had not
been able to submit figures at all because of the computer problems. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Telegraph 7 July 2006
BT plans to
switch software supplier on NHS project. BT is to dump its current
software supplier for the NHS's new multi-billion pound IT system. The company
is in talks to replace GE Healthcare with its US rival Cerner in an attempt to
speed up the already overdue project. Richard Bacon, a member of the Commons
Public Accounts Select Committee, has already asked the Health Secretary to
forbid BT from switching without more careful consideration. No formal
contract has been signed between BT and Cerner but an announcement is expected
as early as next week. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Times 7 July 2006
Overhauling the National Health Service computer system so that it could
store 50 million patient records electronically was never going to be an easy
task. Now the £12.4bn project is mired in controversy following delays and
cost overruns. The four companies charged with delivering the new system - BT,
Accenture, Fujitsu and American firm CSC - risk financial pain and
parliamentary scrutiny. Information obtained by shadow Health Secretary Andrew
Lansley reveals that by 31 March this year the firms had between them received
just £257m on contracts worth almost £5bn, or approximately 5 per cent of
their value, while they are estimated to have spent at least £1bn so far.
Richard Brooks and Richard Wachman
Sunday July 16, 2006 The Observer
iSoft
investigates possible accounting irregularities. Troubled healthcare
software provider iSoft admitted last night that it had launched an
investigation into "possible accounting irregularities", casting further gloom
over the government's £6.2bn upgrade to the NHS's IT system. iSoft is supposed
to supply electronic patient records and clinical software to three of five
English regions.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Guardian
21 July 2006
Hospitals
resort to pen and paper after £1bn computer crashes. A £1bn
administrative computer system
used by eight major hospitals and 72 primary care trusts crashed on Sunday
morning following problems with power supply. The system, which is used to log
appointments, admissions, operating theatre booking and local clinics, is
supplied be CSC Alliance based in Maidstone, Kent. The crash was caused by a
power failure in the company's central data centre making it inaccessible. The
incident has affected services to other CSC Alliance customers though they
have now been restored; NHS systems are currently still being brought back up.
Adrian McDermott, the deputy chief information officer for
NHS North West said that staff were using manual back up systems and
checking appointment lists by hand which "will cost time and money when we
have to input the information". He added: "We have managed the impact as best
we can."
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Telegraph
1 August 2006
Private sector
to expand role in NHS tests. The
private sector is to make further inroads into the National Health Service
after the government signalled an expanded role for companies providing blood
and other tissue tests.
A faster pathology service is deemed essential if the government is to get the
maximum wait between an appointment with the GP and a completed operation or
treatment down to 18 weeks. NHS staff and Labour MPs are becoming increasingly
vocal over their opposition to the creeping involvement of the private sector
in the health service, with public sector unions and doctors' and nurses'
bodies taking the rare step of joining forces in a campaign against the
changes. The Royal College of Pathologists accused ministers of failing to
take heed of the dangers of involving the private sector, particularly the
risk of companies "cherry picking" routine tests and leaving NHS labs with
more complex and expensive procedures. It has also been confirmed that the
NHS's multi-billion pound programme to create an
electronic patient record suffered
a setback when the software company setting up the scheme in
London was sacked by BT, the prime contractor. IDX Systems, part of GE
Healthcare, will be replaced by Cerner.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Financial
Times 3 August 2006
Isoft faces
formal probe as auditors find irregularities. Isoft faces the prospect of
a formal investigation after a preliminary examination of its past accounts
found evidence of irregularities. The struggling healthcare software group,
which provides software for the government's £6.2bn National Programme for
Information Technology, told the stock exchange yesterday that the initial
investigation launched two weeks ago by Deloitte, its new auditor, had
concluded that there were grounds for a further probe.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Financial
Times 9 August 2006
The NHS has admitted it made an upfront payment to healthcare software
provider iSoft in the last days of its 2005 financial year. The firm's
auditors found this week that revenues that year were recognised earlier than
they should have been. Simon Bowers
Thursday August 10, 2006 The Guardian
NHS delivers
fresh blow to sickly iSoft. Troubled software company iSoft has suffered
another blow after an NHS trust abandoned the
implementation of its patient
management system, part of the national programme to digitise patient
health records, after several delays. The
Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust said it took the
decision because a number of requirements had not been met before the system
was due to go live in June this year. The trust is now seeking an "alternative
solution" but said it was still committed to the national programme. This is
the latest in a series of problems for iSoft, which had to restate its
accounts earlier this year and is undergoing an investigation into possible
accounting irregularities. iSoft shares, which have tumbled 90pc since the
start of the year, rose ½ to 49p.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Telegraph
18 August 2006
A multi-billion pound plan by the government to link the computer systems
of every hospital and GPs' surgery is unlikely to be delivered on time and may
fall short of the NHS's requirements, according to a confidential review
leaked to The Observer The revelations will prove acutely embarrassing for the
government, coming at a time when up to 10 hospitals may be closed by
cash-strapped NHS trusts. So far the project's total costs have spiralled from
an estimated £2bn, at its launch in October 2002, to an estimated £15bn now.
Tony Blair has set great personal store by the Connecting for Health system -
holding the records of 30 million patients - arguing that an electronic
database will create 'choice' within the NHS. Jamie Doward, home affairs
editor
Sunday August 20, 2006 The Observer
NHS computer
chaos deepens. The multi-billion pound NHS computer system is unlikely to
be on time and may fall short of the health service's requirements. The
project's costs have spiralled from an initial £2bn to an estimated £15bn. Yet
the government has consistently defended the plan, with Tony Blair insisting
it will create 'choice' within the NHS. Now a review conducted by consultant
firms Accenture and CSC a month ago has revealed that the software developed
by IT company Isoft for the electronic database is unlikely to be ready by the
government's date of 2008. Moreover the report has identified 13 out of 39
areas of the software project as in need of immediate work and 21 as posing a
potential risk; only five areas have been given a green light. The report
highlights the issue of clinical safety noting that, while a director of
clinical safety had been appointed, financial problems were hampering efforts
to set up a team to oversee the issue. The consultants also noted that Isoft's
"programme planning…is based upon unrealistic assumptions that drive
unachievable plans that ultimately fail to deliver on time."
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of BBC Online 20
August 2006
NHS report
'criticisms deleted'. A report into the £6.8bn NHS IT upgrade had
criticisms removed and toned down before publication. The BBC has obtained
documents that show passages were removed from a National Audit Office report
during consultation. The NAO defended the report saying that consultation with
interested parties was normal and that its main conclusions had been left
unaltered. However others have said the report was watered down. Changed
phrases include the government being "slow in securing the engagement and
commitment of the NHS to the programme" becoming a simple recommendation that
more work was needed on engagement. "Insufficient trainers to train NHS staff"
became staff considered the biggest barrier to implementation was a lack of
knowledge and training. Tory MP Richard Bacon voiced his surprise at the
report as "it did not reflect many of the concerns", and Sandra Gidley,
Liberal Democrat health spokesperson, lamented the changes to what they were
"expecting (to be) a hard hitting report".
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of BBC Online 21
August 2006
'No believable plan' for completion of iSoft work on NHS overhaul.
Review flags up 13 'red' areas of acute concern. Software firm insists
parts of system are being set up. Simon Bowers
Monday
August 21, 2006 The Guardian
Company at heart of NHS reform in serious trouble. Accounting questions
and plunging profits put £6.2bn IT upgrade in doubt. Simon Bowers and Richard
Wray
Wednesday August 23, 2006 The Guardian
Yet another setback for Blair's vision of a hi-tech NHS. Inquiry casts
shadow over £6.2bn computer scheme as doctors back change, but doubt it can be
delivered. Bobbie Johnson and Sarah Hall
Thursday August 24, 2006 The Guardian
iSoft, the software firm at the heart of a much-delayed NHS computer
upgrade, today reported a £343.8m loss and suspended its commercial director.
Steve Graham, iSoft's commercial director, was suspended today after an
initial review pending the outcome of a more formal investigation, amid the
company's growing accounting problems. The company yesterday confirmed a
Guardian newspaper report that it was under investigation by the Financial
Services Authority for possible breaches of accounting standards. Mark Tran
Friday August 25, 2006 Guardian Unlimited
Computer costs
exceed benefits. Ministers approved the huge NHS computer system in spite
of reports showing that its costs exceeded its likely benefits. They now
concede that the planned £6.3 billion scheme will cost £12.4 billion by the
time it is fully implemented. Now documents released to the Evening Standard
in London under the Freedom of Information Act suggest that costs outweighed
benefits in eight out of ten components of the scheme, called Connecting for
Health. The project is divided into five regional "hubs", and the data
released shows that for four of them, including London, the benefits of the
scheme were calculated at £438 million, against costs of £604 million. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Times 25 August 2006
Computer
experts back calls for review of £6.2bn NHS project. The British Computer
Society, the chartered institute for British IT professionals, has thrown its
weight behind calls for a review of the over-budget and delayed NHS IT
project. In a leaked letter to academics the Chairman of the BCS, Glyn Hayes,
lists concerns over the project. He questions the suitability of the system's
centralised "spine" for the complex NHS network and points to a lack of
planning in some areas. BT, which has faced problems with its software partner
for the scheme, is building the spine and is also responsible for delivering
new IT to London. The 10-year contract for the capitol will total £996m, only
£1.3m of which BT has received for the first two years work. Many have blamed
iSoft, developer of the main plank of software for the programme, for the
delays with the company's two partners saying that the software, named
Lorenzo, has "no believable plan for release". Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Guardian
29 August 2006
MPs urge
rethink of NHS records project. The controversial programme to upgrade the
National Health Service's IT systems has suffered another blow after two MPs
called for an overhaul of the project yesterday. Richard Bacon, the
Conservative MP for South Norfolk, and John Pugh, the Liberal Democrat MP for
Southport, argued that the programme should be reformed to allow hospital
trusts to purchase systems locally that can then be linked into the national
network. Both MPs are members of the Commons Public Accounts Committee that
reviewed the programme in June. The pair said that the project's "fundamental
error" was to centralise the procurement of single systems across the NHS. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Independent
31 August 2006
New setback for
NHS computer. Two thirds of hospital trusts will not meet the October
deadline for installing the new electronic patient administration system. The
delay has raised concerns that the project, already two years behind, is
continuing to overrun with some questioning whether the predicted £12.4bn
cost, already well over original estimates, could spiral further out of
control to as much as £15bn. Of the 22 NHS trusts meant to be receiving the
new system by October, only seven will meet the deadline, according to a
survey by E-Health Insider, a specialist online magazine for health
professionals. The further difficulties undermine the credibility of
Connecting for Health, the body overseeing the project, after it assured the
Commons Public Accounts Committee that 22 trusts would receive the system by
the end of next month. Two of the committee's members, Liberal Democrat MP
John Paugh and Conservative MP Richard Bacon, have taken the step of warning
that the NHS is in danger of "sleepwalking to disaster" and wasting billions
of pounds if the project is not scaled back. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Observer
3 September 2006
Spending
Watchdog to reopen inquiry into NHS computer overhaul delays. The National
Audit Office is to re-examine the new NHS computer system only months after
giving it a clean bill of health. The NAO refused to say why it was returning
to the National Programme for IT (NPfIT) so soon after its report praising the
scheme for "the notable progress and tight control of the central aspect of
the program." The move comes after embarrassing revelations, and stringent
denials, of how wording and emphasis were watered down for the report in June.
The NPfIT has faced a string of crisis from continued delays in implementation
to severe doubts from some of its biggest players. ISoft, the firm charged
with supplying the main plank of software for the system has hit financial
trouble and is under investigation by the Financial Services Authority. Many
of the other companies involved, including BT and Accenture, have faced
mounting problems and there are signs that NHS trusts are losing faith in the
scheme. Many have already dropped any plans to use the system, favouring
self-funded solutions over the government funded scheme despite financial
problems. Patient Administration Systems, the only part of the plan to have
yet been deployed to some hospitals, have proved problematic already. Last
month, systems at eighty hospitals went down for four days due to a failure at
a data centre. A data recovery system failed to provide backup. The Commons
health select committee is to examine the programme in the autumn and could
call for a full review. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Guardian
5 September 2006
Thomlinson to
run Accenture in UK. Accenture has appointed a new head of UK operations
as part of a global shift in the consulting company's structure. David
Thomlinson replaces Lis Astall as UK managing director. Accenture, with a
large role in the £6.2bn upgrade to the NHS's information technology system,
has become mired in controversy. The company has taken a $450m charge against
potential losses from its work with the NHS and has a fractious relationship
with Isoft, its software sub-contractor. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Financial
Times 7 September 2006
BT looks into
connecting for health. BT is keen to take on any parts of the £6.2bn NHS
IT programme abandoned by Accenture as the consultancy group negotiates a
possible withdrawal. The programme to upgrade the NHS computer system has been
dogged by delays and infighting between suppliers - Isoft is in a financially
precarious position and Accenture is trying to renegotiate its participation
amid fears it will make a huge loss. Patrick O'Connell, head of BT's health
division, said BT had booked "hundreds of millions of pounds" in revenue and
was confident of making a profit. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Financial
Times 14 September 2006
ISoft problems surfaced after NHS pulled plug in April. Government
refused to extend software contract. Plea for another up-front payment
was rejected. Simon Bowers
Friday September 15, 2006 The Guardian
The government's £12.4bn programme to upgrade IT systems in the NHS
experienced more than 110 technical breakdowns during the past four months, it
emerged last night. John Carvel, social affairs editor
Tuesday September 19, 2006 The Guardian
Patients left
on operating tables by computer failures. The new NHS computer system
suffers almost one "major incident" failure every day, delaying operations and
consultations across England. The scale of the problem has prompted calls for
a rethink of the £12.4bn scheme amid fears for patient safety. Computer Weekly
reports that over 110 major incidents of failure have occurred over the past
four months. Problems have included the failure of systems providing surgeons
with X-rays during surgery and a loss of access to the patient administration
systems which hold records on appointments and planned treatments. However
Connecting for Health, the body overseeing the project, claimed that the new
system was more reliable than the one it was replacing. Nevertheless critics
are worried about the potential harm to patients as the system is expanded to
cover more of the NHS and processes such as proscribing drugs and ordering
tests. Richard Bacon, Conservative member of the Public Accounts Committee
said: "In many respects the NHS IT programme is making things worse, not
better." A Connecting for Health spokesperson said the term 'major incident'
was open to interpretation and that reports were often made when the system
was merely running slowly, adding that "we expect performance to compare
favourably with any large-scale organisation that uses IT." Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Times
19 September 2006
IT providers
left in the debris of NHS's big bang. The National Programme for IT, which
aims to create electronic patient records and link all the NHS IT systems
across the country, attempts to drag the National Health Service into the 21st
century. However, the 10-year £6.2bn project has been beset with controversy
and delays. The project is run by Connecting for Health, headed by Richard
Granger. The procurement process was completed in less than a year amid fierce
competition. And Granger shifted a vast amount of the risk associated with the
project to the service providers, which have to demonstrate that their systems
work before being paid. Increased competition forced prices so low that some
observers say the final bids were unworkable. Critics also say procurement was
rushed and ignored the complexity of the programme and the need for
consultation. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Telegraph
28 September 2006
US consultancy firm Computer Sciences Corporation has taken over as the
largest regional contractor on the NHS's troubled £6.2bn IT overhaul after
rival group Accenture yesterday exited two 10-year contracts with the health
service worth £2bn. CSC, already the lead contractor on a £973m contract in
the north-west of England, is now charged with computerising largely
paper-based systems in GP surgeries, hospitals and other NHS trusts in the
east and north-east of England. Accenture yesterday remained circumspect about
its reasons for leaving the NHS's National Programme for IT (NPfIT) after
almost three years' work. Under the terms of its exit agreement, Accenture
must repay £63m of the £173m it has been paid for work delivered on its two
contracts. The settlement is a fraction of damages the NHS promised to extract
in the event of a major contractor leaving the project. Accenture faced a
maximum liability on the two contracts of close to £1bn. Earlier this year,
Accenture made a £240m provision against future losses on its work on the
NPfIT. This came on top of a £75m loss on the two contracts last year. Simon
Bowers
Friday September 29, 2006 Guardian
The company charged with rescuing the NHS's troubled IT system has
consistently failed to meet its deadlines for introducing the project across
the health service, The Observer can reveal. Last week Computer Sciences
Corporation (CSC) was awarded a £2bn contract to take on a bigger role in
overseeing the implementation of the Connecting for Health system, the biggest
civilian computer project in history which is supposed to electronically link
all doctors' surgeries and hospitals. But government hopes that CSC will prove
the £12.4bn project's salvation have been hit by news that the company has
itself experienced huge problems in implementing even the most basic parts of
the project. According to its original business plan, obtained by The
Observer, CSC was contracted to install new computer systems to 32 acute
hospitals by April 2006. However, according to the NHS, only eight of the
hospitals had received the basic 'administrative' systems by that date and the
company had failed to deliver any working clinical systems - the key part of
the project which is supposed to record a person's medical data
electronically. Nearly three years into the project CSC continues to miss
targets, due in part to problems with the software provided by iSoft, the
troubled IT company currently being investigated for accounting
irregularities.Jamie Doward, home affairs editor
Sunday October 1, 2006 The Observer
Fat cats of the
public sector take top pay. The civil servant in charge of the Health
Service's disaster-prone £20 billion computer system is being paid £280,000 a
year. Richard Granger's salary is £100,000 more than Tony Blair's - yet his 'Connecting
for Health ' system has so far cost double its initial projection of £6
billion and is more than two years behind schedule. Granger was brought in
from the consultancy Deloitte in 2002. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Times
8 October 2006
Query over
£12bn NHS IT upgrade. Scientists have sent an open letter to the Commons
health select committee calling for a probe into the National Programme for IT
in which they express their doubt that the system will "work adequately". IT
experts from Oxford and Cambridge universities are though to be the leading
signatories of the letter that stresses the urgency of a review. NHS
Connecting for Health, which oversees the project, said it recognised that a
range of parties could offer "helpful perspectives" though suggested that not
just those from computer science should be involved. The organisation said it
was "currently exploring the possibility of a reference panel made up of a mix
of academic and non-academic disciplines". Last month it emerged that there
had already been 110 major glitches in the last four months for those
organisations already using the programme. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of BBC Online 10
October 2006
Serious problems with one of iSoft's most complex hospital computer system
installations are threatening to wipe more than £16m off the expected income
for University Hospital of North
Staffordshire. Simon Bowers
Monday October 16, 2006 The Guardian
A key delivery target on the NHS's £6.2bn IT upgrade will be missed in two
weeks time as the troubled project fails to meet a promise to have iSoft
patient-administration systems installed at 20 acute trusts by the end of
October. The latest NHS figures show 11 of the iSoft systems were operational
at the end of September - just one more than when the promise was made to MPs
in June. Simon Bowers and Jill Treanor
Tuesday October 17, 2006 The Guardian
Congratulations to the NHS for facing down Accenture. The refusal at the
end of last month to renegotiate contracts worth £2bn that were less than
three years into their 10-year life led to the consultancy giant's decision to
resign as a prime contractor from the NHS National Programme for IT. Although
presented as an amicable parting of the ways, it is the most spectacular
bust-up between IT contractor and government in 20 years of systems
outsourcing. Comment has been surprisingly kind to Accenture, with apparent
agreement that if a firm that canny sees no future in the NHS, the world's
biggest civil IT programme must be in deep trouble. But I think that's wrong,
and now that spin has passed, it's time to point out that any sympathy for
Accenture is misplaced. Although the programme has flaws, nothing that has
happened in the past three years was unforeseen at the outset. Michael Cross
Thursday October 19, 2006 The Guardian
Fujitsu, one of the lead contractors on the NHS's troubled £6.2bn IT
upgrade, has installed only three patient-administration systems in
two-and-a-half years on the project. It has recently all but frozen further
installations while it struggles to fix problems at these sites. Fujitsu's
problems are the latest blow for the health service's ambitious IT upgrade,
the biggest non-military project of its kind in the world, which has been
dogged by delays and contract disputes. Simon Bowers
Tuesday October 24, 2006 The Guardian
Spine-chilling. The most closely guarded of secrets are often medical. A
history of depression, a sexually transmitted disease or a long-ago abortion
may well be deeply personal matters which many people would wish to remain
private. Likewise, anyone who has recovered from a drug problem or from a
suicide attempt may dread nothing more than these facts about their past
getting into the wrong hands. Sometimes the desire for privacy reflects
disposition, sometimes the potential impact on work or on family. Whatever the
grounds, there is a right to expect that the confidentiality of one's medical
history should be respected.Which is why there are good causes for alarm in
our reports today about the way in which such data is being transferred to
electronic records. There is a cause for real doubt about whether medical
privacy can continue to be guaranteed. Leader
Wednesday November 1, 2006 The Guardian
In the second of our series on the NHS's new database we talk to Helen
Wilkinson, named as having a drink problem after a computer error. Rob Evans
Thursday November 2, 2006 The Guardian
How Icelanders gave computer scheme cold shoulder. In the last part of our
series on the planned NHS database, we look at a rebellion that succeeded.
David Leigh in Reykjavik
Friday November 3, 2006 The Guardian
GPs revolt over patient files privacy Poll shows doctors fear national
database will be at risk from hackers.
About 50% of family doctors are threatening to defy government instructions to
automatically put patient records on a new national database because of fears
that they will not be safe, a Guardian poll reveals today. It shows that GPs
are expressing grave doubts about access to the "Spine" - an electronic
warehouse being built to store information on about 50 million patients - and
how information on it could be vulnerable to hackers, bribery and blackmail.
The survey reveals that four out of five doctors think the confidentiality of
their patients' medical records will be at risk if the government proceeds
with plans to load them on to the new database. More than 60% of family
doctors in England also said they feared records would be vulnerable to
hackers and unauthorised access by public officials from outside the NHS and
social care. Ministers have committed a large slice of the NHS's £12bn IT
upgrade to developing the Spine. They acted on the assumption that doctors
would provide the information without asking their patients' permission first.
The new system has been constructed to upload information from GPs' computer
systems automatically, without giving patients a say. But the poll found 51%
of GPs are unwilling to allow this uploading without getting each patient's
specific consent. Only 13% say they are willing to proceed without consent and
the rest are unsure or lack enough information to comment. John Carvel, social
affairs editor
Tuesday November 21, 2006 Guardian
NHS plan for central patient database alarms doctors.
Poll shows dwindling support for IT project. GPs say system destroys medical
confidentiality. A poll of doctors about the new £12bn computer system for the
NHS shows growing unease about a potential threat to patients' rights. After
answering questions by the medical pollsters Medix, the GPs and hospital
doctors were invited to volunteer comments. John Carvel, social affairs editor
Tuesday November 21, 2006 The Guardian
Scots NHS 'gets poor value for £100m IT spend'.
The NHS in
Scotland lacks a joined-up strategy for information technology and does
not know exactly how much it spends overall on the service. A report by Audit
Scotland warned yesterday a "major cultural shift" is required, revealing that
the service gets poor value for the estimated £100m it spends. The Scottish
Executive must do more to improve the way it funds spending, according to the
public sector efficiency watchdog. Funding should be based on a system which
clearly sets out the justification for the investment over the whole lifetime
of the project and the benefits which will be delivered. This happens at
present only when spending exceeds £2m, it said. The recommendations came in
an independent report on how IT is managed by the NHS in Scotland. In the
past, the health service has had a range of locally developed IT systems, and
the report says the executive must continue to improve the way it manages IT.
The report is published two days after Health Minister Andy Kerr signed a
£300m contract to provide the NHS with a new computer network. The contract
will provide the NHS with most of its national computer services for 11 years,
in areas ranging from patient records to nurse roster systems and the payroll.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Herald 23 November
2006
Switch threatens health service IT suppliers.
The Government has signalled a change of tack in the disastrous IT programme
for the NHS as it shifts "ownership" of the project from central management to
local NHS trusts. The news comes shortly after a minister admitted that the
programme's managing body, Connecting for Health, could be scrapped.
Bridgewell analyst Kevin Ashton said: "There would be massive implications for
the local service providers [such as BT, Fujitsu and CSC] if we're talking
about decentralisation of the ability to procure services. That would
effectively be the end of the National Programme." The new boss of the NHS,
David Nicholson, ordered the local ownership programme as one of his first
jobs since taking the helm in September. However, critics say he has not gone
far enough. Richard Bacon, Conservative MP and member of the Public Accounts
Committee, said: "What it is not saying is a shift in control. What it boils
down to is … a way of decentralising blame." Connecting for Health is under
increasing pressure as the programme falls behind schedule and costs look
likely to spiral to £20bn, or £7.6bn over budget. The agency's future was put
in the balance when the government said its status would be reviewed after
five years. Previously industry experts thought Connecting for Health would
remain permanently to administer the IT programme. The Department of Health
has now said: "Connecting for Health is preparing for executive agency status
and its management is therefore undertaking a review to ensure that it is
correctly structured and staffed to deliver the projected programme [to]
schedule." The National Programme aims to digitise patient care records,
provide an electronic appointment booking and prescription service, and link
up all the NHS's IT systems. But support for the project has waned. A recent
Medix survey showed that around two thirds of doctors do not consider it a
good use of NHS resources.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Telegraph
24 November 2006
Technology
programme delay grows at NHS. The £12.4bn NHS IT programme is to undergo
an overhaul that is likely to further delay the project. The chief executive
of the NHS, David Nicholson, has ordered a review of both the scope and
operation of the project, looking at whether it is "too prescriptive" in what
it offers GPs and hospitals. Connecting for Health which runs the project is
to be slimmed down and turned into an executive agency with some staff being
transferred to local NHS control. It is hoped the review will resolve key
ambiguities about the plan as Richard Granger, the programmes head, said that
NHS financial problems and a need for more useful software meant that the new
patient administration systems would be further delayed. He said that other
aspects of the programme, such as digital imaging systems, software for the
new NHS payment system and electronic proscribing, would receive greater
focus. Mr Granger has continually blamed policy and operational difficulties
for the project's problems rather than IT issues. He will remain in charge of
the roll-out but, as chief executive, Mr Nicholson has now become the
programme's senior overseer, seeking to reassure himself that it will provide
what the NHS needs, while making sure the service finally comes to "own" it.
Mr Granger has indicated that he will support such changes. "Sorting out
consent [whether patients should be asked before their medical records are
uploaded on to the system] is a policy question that is being pinned on me
[that] I would say belongs elsewhere [in the department]," he said. Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Financial
Times 27 November 2006
Most patients reject NHS database in poll.
ICM finding released at campaign launch. Leaked report reveals safeguard
problems. A national campaign was launched last night to persuade people to
refuse on privacy grounds to have their medical records uploaded to a national
database. David Leigh and Rob Evans
Thursday November 30, 2006 The Guardian
GPs angered by call to reveal names of NHS database rebels.
The Department of Health provoked uproar among doctors yesterday by asking GPs
in England to send in correspondence from objectors who do not want their
confidential medical records placed on the Spine, a national NHS database. Sir
Liam Donaldson, the chief medical officer, said letters from patients who want
to keep their private medical details out of the government's reach should be
sent to Patricia Hewitt, the health secretary, for "full consideration".
Campaigners who fear the national database will infringe patients' civil
liberties said the exercise would give Ms Hewitt access to the names and
addresses of patients most likely to be offended by government intrusion. GPs
wrote to the General Medical Council asking for a ruling on whether Sir Liam
had broken the doctors' code of good practice by using his authority to
encourage GPs to breach patient confidentiality without clinical
justification. John Carvel, social affairs editor
Saturday December 2, 2006 The Guardian
Health officials reject requests to opt out of patient database
.
Department's letter says fears are not valid. Many 'harmed by
unavailability of records'. Patients who have complained about the idea of
having their confidential medical records uploaded on a new centralised NHS
database were sent letters over the weekend flatly rejecting their concerns.
In an uncompromising statement, the Department of Health said nobody could
have genuine grounds for claiming "substantial and unwarranted distress" as a
result of having their intimate medical details included on a national
computer system, known as the Spine. John Carvel, social affairs editor
Monday
December 4, 2006 The Guardian
Hospital
reforms, air ambulances and 'super' A&Es. Professor Martin McKee and Dr
Ellen Nolte of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine write in a
letter to the Times: "The
Private Finance Initiative, which has funded virtually all hospital
developments for the past decade, requires hospitals to make fixed payments
for 30 years or more. Any change to existing facilities during this time will
incur even greater costs. Yet the new system for paying hospitals is likely to
make income streams extremely volatile. Fixed outgoings and unpredictable
income, both largely outside the control of hospital management, are simply
incompatible. The health authorities are still reeling from the most recent
reorganisation, which led to the loss of many highly skilled staff. The
implementation of a complex health
information system is consuming enormous resources and management time,
while new
independent treatment centres are destabilising the system by creaming off
non-urgent care. Finally, those managing the training of health professionals
must adapt to the changing pattern of hospitals while themselves being
reorganised. Hospitals do need to adapt to changing circumstances but they
will need time to do so, a crucial element that seem to have been ignored
consistently in the stream of recent reforms."
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Times
8 December 2006
Ailing iSoft's
future in doubt after plunging into the red. ISoft, the beleaguered
software company with a key role in the multi-billion pound IT programme for
the NHS, has warned it may be unable to continue operating after plunging into
the red in the first half following a costly restructuring.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Telegraph
12 December 2006
NHS IT system
offers poor value for money says British Computer Society. The British
Computer Society (BCS) has criticised the NHS IT programme for being bad value
for money and slowing down existing IT projects in hospitals. In a report
based on the opinions of IT workers, both within and outside the NHS, the BSC
says: "The National Programme for IT has been successful in limiting payment
for non-delivery, but having underspent because of not delivering is hardly a
success and the central costs incurred by NHS Connecting for Health are such
that, so far, the value for money from services deployed is poor. The
deployment of departmental systems in hospital has been slowed down by the
unsuccessful attempts of the National Programme for IT to meet this demand
with fully integrated enterprise systems that have yet to be implemented (or
in some cases produced)." The BSC said that it had initially started the
report to defend the project from being axed after it received "heavy attack".
The report recommends focusing on local implementation of the plan, building
on "what presently works and encouraging convergence to standards over time".
The report goes on to say that "until confidentiality issues are resolved, we
believe it is better to push information from one professional to another via
the messaging system," and that doctors should only be able to access records
from the system in an emergency.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Telegraph
15 December 2006
Patients win right to keep records off NHS computer.
The government has bowed to privacy concerns about a new NHS computer system
and conceded that patients should be allowed a veto on information about their
medical history being passed from their GP to a national database. Following a
Guardian campaign against the compulsory uploading of personal details to the
system known as The Spine, Lord Warner, the health minister, will announce a
plan that would allow individuals to review and correct their records and
withhold them from the database. Critics fear that details about mental
illness, abortions, pregnancy, HIV status, drug-taking or alcoholism could
become vulnerable to prying by the police, insurance companies and hackers
working for the press. This month the Department of Health sent more than
1,300 curt letters rejecting requests from patients for their medical details
to be kept off the national database. But ministers have changed their minds
after advice from a taskforce on patient records headed by Harry Cayton, the
department's "patient tsar". John Carvel, social affairs editor
Saturday December 16, 2006 The Guardian
How patients' protests forced a rethink on NHS computer records.
The question no one asked: what do you think? Taskforce seeks to find a
form of compromise. The government's change of policy on patient
records, disclosed in the Guardian today, is the first departure from a
roadmap drawn by Tony Blair in 2002 when he approved a scheme to spend
billions on a new IT system for the NHS. The prime minister was captivated by
the vision of a national database containing the medical records of 50 million
patients throughout England. Heads of the corporations developing cutting edge
technology convinced him that lives could be saved if doctors, nurses and
paramedics could gain instant access to key information about patients that
might cause conventional treatments to cause life-threatening reactions.
Instead of consultants waiting for hours to locate the patient's GP and ask
for relevant information, a paramedic on the scene would be able to access
data from a palmtop computer. Who could object? John Carvel, social affairs
editor
Saturday December 16, 2006 The Guardian
Patients veto
for e-care records. Ministers have backed down over plans to place every
person's medical records on the NHS "spine" by offering a right to veto them
being uploaded. The move comes after doctors and patients expressed fears that
the electronic record system could damage the relationship between patients
and doctors and compromise confidentiality. Further problems were raised when
polls showed many doctors were prepared to defy the government plans to upload
all records without patient consent. Pilots of the project are due to start in
the spring and the government is now to set up an advisory board to see how
the veto can be implemented. It is envisaged that patients will be able to
view their records online before they are uploaded to the database, and amend
information or restrict access to the document. If patients do not do so then
they will be assumed to have consented to their records being uploaded. The
U-turn was prompted by a report by patient's tsar, Harry Cayton, which said
that the project needed "public support and clinical confidence". Some issues
on sensitive data, such as HIV status, are yet to be decided. Health Minister
Lord Warner said: "We are going forward cautiously. We believe that despite
the noise it has generated patient care records will be of huge benefit to
patients' care. We believe there are some myths about how effective the
current arrangements are in regards to safety." The move was welcomed by the
British Medical Association which has remained sceptical of the plans. James
Johnson, the association's chairman, said: "The recommendations provide a good
first step and we look forward to building on this work." Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of BBC Online 18 December 2006
Minister admits U-turn on NHS database amid privacy fears.
The government gave a categorical assurance yesterday that NHS patients would
have an absolute right of veto on any part of their medical records being
uploaded to a national database. The health minister Lord Warner confirmed a
report in the Guardian on Saturday that the government was abandoning an
attempt to oblige GPs to provide a medical summary on every patient for a
centralised electronic record. John Carvel, social affairs editor
Tuesday December 19, 2006 The Guardian
Headed for the
rocks. In a comment piece Ross Anderson, chair of the Foundation for
Information Policy Research, writes: "The NHS's ill-starred computer project
is in the news again. After polls showed that most doctors and patients oppose
a compulsory national database of medical records, health minister Lord Warner
promised an opt-out. But don't break out the champagne yet. The report was
cleverly spun; hidden in an appendix is confirmation that you can opt out of
the Summary Care Record, but not the Detailed Care Record. The first is merely
a synopsis for emergency care. But ministers are not offering an easy opt-out
from the second - the database replacing your current GP and hospital records.
They plan to "upload" your GP data over the next year or two to a regional
hosting centre run by a government contractor. The data will initially remain
under your GP's nominal control but, after hospital records have been uploaded
too, the chief medical officer will be the custodian of the whole lot. Your
"electronic health record" will be used for many purposes, from cost control
through audit to research. So the Home Office plans to use health data to help
predict which children are likely to offend (despite a recent report to the
information commissioner that collecting large amounts of data on children
without their parents' consent will probably break human rights law) yet
confidentiality is often vital for care. Ministers say that the rules for
police access to data will not change, but this masks a practical shift. At
present the law allows the police access to health records that contain
evidence of a crime. Once the records of millions of people are on one system,
to which a court will give access without GPs' knowledge, the police will be
sorely tempted… Gordon Brown will have to decide soon whether to scrap the
central database and build safe systems that will work. If he calls it wrong
then it may well be the decision for which he is remembered."
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public
of Guardian
21 December 2006
NHS £6bn IT system poor value, say experts.
Schemes 'costing four times going rate'. Health officials reject claims
of overpayments. Leading healthcare IT experts have warned that the NHS's
troubled £6.2bn system upgrade is costing taxpayers substantially more than it
should. They claim the same functions could be delivered for considerably less
outsid e of the national programme for IT, dogged by delays and software
setbacks. Simon Bowers
Monday
January 22, 2007 The Guardian
£20bn NHS
computer system "doomed to fail". A senior insider has given a damning
warning over the government's NHS computer system. Andrew Rollerson, the
health-care consultancy practice lead at the computer giant Fujitsu, said that
the project "isn't working and isn't going to work", and that firms involved
were in danger of delivering "a camel and not the racehorse that we might try
to produce". In a speech on the project delivered to a conference of computer
experts last week, he went on to criticise a lack of visionary leadership and
implied that the project had lost its way. Summing up the situation, Mr
Rollerson painted a bleak picture: "There is a belief that the national
programme is somehow going to propel transformation in the NHS simply by
delivering an IT system. Nothing could be further from the truth. A vacuum, a
chasm, is opening up." Stephen O'Brien, the shadow health minister, said:
"Even those from inside the programme are now telling the Government that it
is coming apart at the seams."
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Telegraph
13 February 2007
Faulty software
puts child health at risk. The health of children is at risk because an
NHS computer system wrecked 20 years of accurate immunisation records. Faulty
software introduced in 2005 has left some primary care trusts (PCTs) unable to
track whether children have been vaccinated and screened for genetic
conditions, raising fears that many are unprotected against diseases. Parents
are not being reminded when their children are due for jabs and check-ups. The
Health Protection Agency cannot publish full statistics on the uptake of
vaccines because the five worst-affected
London trusts cannot provide accurate data. When the shortcomings of the
Child Health Interim Application (CHIA) software were disclosed by The Times a
year ago, the Department of Health stated that the problems were being
addressed. But staff are said to be "in despair" at continuing difficulties
with the system supplied by BT.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Times
13 February 2007
Potential buyer emerges for iSoft.
The Australian health information company IBA Health has emerged as a possible
rescue-bidder for iSoft, the struggling NHS software supplier. Fiona Walsh,
business editor
Friday February 16, 2007 Guardian Unlimited
NHS seeks rival IT firms as trusts lose faith in iSoft.
The NHS will start recruiting alternative software suppliers to its troubled
£6.2bn IT upgrade project this month, in a move which could see the
government's vision for a single IT system for the health service in England
unravelling. The move is a tacit admission that a fully integrated IT system
may never be completed. NHS bosses had until recently discouraged hospital
trusts from deserting the scheme. But disaffection is now so widespread and
delays so long that officials are working on a list of accredited alternative
suppliers, which is widely seen as a move to appease hospital trusts. Simon
Bowers
Monday March 5, 2007 The Guardian
New man at NHS
supplier CSC will keep health service job too - BMA warns he must 'declare
conflict of interest'. CSC, a key supplier to the NHS's £12.4bn National
Programme for IT (NPfIT), has appointed two NHS managers to beef up its UK
healthcare business - one of whom will continue to work for the NHS as well.
CSC is the lead contractor for three of NPfIT's five regions, following the
pull-out of Accenture last year. The IT contractor named Pearse Butler,
formerly chief executive of the Cumbria and Lancashire strategic health
authority, as director of clinical engagement, while Rajan Madhok, medical
director at Manchester primary care trust, has been appointed clinical
director, in a move CSC said would support its approach to engaging with
health professionals. But Madhok will retain his NHS post, and will "divide
his time between his new position at CSC and his duties as medical director of
the Manchester PCT", the company said. Dr Richard Vautrey, IT lead on the
British Medical Association's GP negotiating committee, warned that Madhok
should "declares his conflict of interest in any settings where it may be
necessary for him to do so". Pearse Butler was a senior representative for
NPfIT's North West and West Midlands region - one of three where CSC is lead
contractor. The Cumbria and Lancashire SHA was abolished in an NHS
reorganisation last year. Butler has also been chief executive at an acute
hospital trust.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Computer
World UK 12 March 2007
Divisive choice.
An IT scheme for
booking hospital appointments is well behind its take-up target, but it does
have its supporters, reports SA Mathieson. Choose & Book, the IT programme
that allows GPs to book hospital appointments electronically at a time
convenient to their patients, is set to miss a key target. The government
wanted 90% of referrals by GPs to run through the system by March, but usage
is well below that. However the figures hide a more complex picture, with some
GPs enthusiastic about the system and others critical.
Tuesday March 13, 2007 SocietyGuardian.co.uk
First test launched of NHS's controversial 'Spine' database.
The government's plan to put the medical records of every NHS patient in
England on a central electronic database will begin first trials tomorrow at
two carefully selected GP practices in the north-west. About 14,500 patients
in Bolton will be told their confidential medical details will be uploaded to
a national data warehouse known as the Spine, unless they object. Their
reaction will be the first test of whether patients accept the government's
argument that a national electronic record can save lives - or agree with
campaigners for personal privacy who see the scheme as a lurch towards a Big
Brother state. After a Guardian campaign last year, ministers conceded that
patients should have the right to stop their medical files being passed from
the GP to the national database. But they postponed giving an explanation of
how this would be done until the first trial. Patients at the two practices
will receive individual letters from their GPs tomorrow, posted to their home
addresses, saying they have eight weeks to decide if they want to opt out. If
they do, they will be invited to write to the GP or lodge their objection on a
helpline at NHS Direct. At the same time, Connecting for Health, the NHS's IT
agency, will tell 50 million patients across England about a procedure to
notify their GP if they do not want their records uploaded. John Carvel,
social affairs editor
Thursday March 15, 2007 The Guardian
NHS funding.
In a letter to the Independent Jo Selwood writes: "It is disgraceful that MPs
on the Public Accounts Committee should seek to put the blame for the current
NHS funding crisison
the shoulders of doctors. What about the millions of pounds the Government
is forcing the NHS to
pay to private companies to do operations that could be done better and
more cheaply in-house ? What about
the money being poured into the multi-million pound fiasco that is the
"Connecting for Health" IT project
that very few health professionals actually want
? What about the ever-increasing number of "management consultants"
being brought in to service the ever-expanding numbers of "targets"
and "initiatives'
pouring out from the Government ?
Doctors determine treatment based solely on what is best for the patient.
These decisions are based on clinical need and based on the years of training
and experience of doctors. To try and tell them that the decision should be
based instead on cost can only be detrimental to patients."
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Independent
21 March 2007
NHS pours £100m into finding additional software suppliers.
NHS bosses charged with delivering the much-delayed £6.2bn IT upgrade to
health trusts throughout England have launched a £100m-plus drive for
"additional" IT suppliers to meet "immediate business needs". Separately, the
Guardian has learned that the Australian group IBA Health is close to
abandoning talks over a potential all-share takeover of cash-strapped software
supplier iSoft, which is contracted to provide systems for 60% of the NHS's
troubled National Programme for IT (NPfIT). The decision by NHS bosses to seek
new suppliers is a significant move away from the troubled NPfIT, which has
been running for four years, mired in delays and software setbacks. Concern
has been mounting among clinicians and trust executives that the NPfIT has
become over-reliant on software sub-contractors iSoft and Cerner and the
suitability of their systems. The two firms have been blamed in some quarters
for delays. Simon Bowers
Thursday March 29, 2007 The Guardian
Passing the
reins. On April 1, much of the responsibility for the £6.2bn NHS National
Programme for IT, parts of which are two years late, will pass from NHS
Connecting for Health (CfH) to strategic health authorities (SHAs). The
National Programme for IT local ownership programme will include the transfer
of staff to SHAs from five super-regional "clusters" run by CfH as local
delivery arms. According to a document released by the North-East SHA, this
might include redundancies. The SHAs have formed two groups to deal with the
dominant "local service provider" suppliers, according to documents placed
online by SHAs, based on the areas covered by these companies. BT supplies
London SHA only, but the southern CfH cluster supplied by Fujitsu - covering
the South Central, South-East Coast and South-West SHAs - has established a
south NHS management board. A similar structure has been created for a new "NME"
(North, Midlands and East) group for the six SHAs covering the rest of
England, which are all served by CSC following Accenture's withdrawal from the
national programme. In what might be an indicator of future problems with
these groups, Dr Singleton, the North-East SHA's medical director wrote that
his SHA wanted a decentralised approach to CfH staff, whereas other
authorities want to centralise. A spokesperson for North-East SHA said it
prefers to place staff working across the region within individual trusts, to
keep them in touch with frontline work. The localisation work was mentioned,
but not detailed, by health minister Lord Hunt. He told the Healthcare
Computing conference: "Greater involvement from NHS staff is vital if we are
to offer a product that meets their needs, and supports their day-to-day
working." He added: "It is now time for the local NHS to take ownership of the
programme and its delivery on the ground." CfH said: "The SHAs, in partnership
with trusts and PCTs, will from April 1 have responsibility for the local
delivery and implementation of the national programme, with authority
commensurate with current contractual and commercial constraints." Murray
Bywater, managing director of health IT consultancy Silicon Bridge Research,
said the localisation work could run into problems if SHAs and trusts
disagree, or if they want to alter the terms of the local service providers'
secret contracts. "There will need to be some readjustment of those contracts
for [the suppliers] to operate effectively in the new environment," he said.
The change comes as CfH launches a £100m tender to find additional software
suppliers. Bywater said decisions including this and the localisation work
show power shifting from CfH back to the Department of Health, following the
national programme's numerous difficulties. "The Department of Health is
beginning to reassert itself," he said. "Politically, you can interpret this
as CfH having its wings clipped."
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Guardian
30 March 2007
Hospital's
computers 'a failure'. Medical and secretarial staff at a hospital have
declared a new computer system as "not fit for purpose". The Patient
Administration System introduced to
Milton Keynes General Hospital five weeks ago as part of the Government's
£12.4bn IT scheme for the NHS, is not working, say 79 members of staff in a
letter to the hospital's management. The setback is the latest to hit the
National Programme for IT, run by Connecting for Health, a government agency.
The rebellion at Milton Keynes emerged as Computer Weekly reported that
Connecting for Health had sought to suppress a critical report into the system
by the British Computer Society. In their letter, the staff at Milton Keynes
say the software is "awkward and clunky". "In our opinion, the system should
not be installed in any further hospitals."
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Times
3 April 2007
79 Milton
Keynes staff say Millennium "not fit for purpose". Seventy-nine clinicians
and admin staff at Milton Keynes General Hospital have written an open letter
to the management stating that the new Cerner Millennium system installed by
Fujitsu in February is "not fit purpose". In their open letter, the staff
describe the software as "awkward and clunky" and state: "In our opinion the
system should not be installed in any further hospitals." Reported problems
include clinics not being available, patient notes being lost or unavailable,
staff being trained on a different system to the one implemented and problems
with reporting around key areas such as 18-week waits. One senior clinician
from the trust described the situation in outpatients as "a nightmare". NHS
Connecting for Health said that there had been "some unacceptable problems"
with the new system installed at Milton Keynes which "require immediate
attention". The patient administration system introduced to Milton Keynes
General Hospital five weeks ago as part of the Government's £12.4 billion IT
scheme for the NHS, was installed after repeated delays. The Cerner system is
meant to provide the foundations for developing a Care Records Service (CRS)
of electronic medical records.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of E-Health
Insider 9 April 2007
Lib Dems demand rethink on NHS IT project.
The Liberal Democrats today called for an immediate moratorium on all further
spending on the NHS's £12.4bn IT programme in England pending an independent
inquiry into a mounting catalogue of errors and delays. Norman Lamb, the
party's health spokesman, said the government was in a state of denial about
the technical, financial and political deficiencies of Connecting for Health,
the agency responsible for the scheme, which is the world's biggest ever
non-military IT project.
Fresh blow to
faith in care records. Confidence in Connecting for Health's development
of care records has fallen to a new low with hospital staff claiming that a
patient administration system that will form part of the service is 'not fit
for purpose'. This comes on top of existing concerns about patient
confidentiality and the robustness of the national spine. Management at
Milton Keynes General Hospital, one of the five trusts at which the
Millennium system has been rolled out, were sent a letter from 79 hospital
doctors and administrative staff reporting major problems. The Millennium
system is a patient administration system that includes a module allowing
clinicians to record medical problems and procedures directly onto the
electronic patient record. Staff reported that the system was 'clunky', and
that patient notes were lost or impossible to access. 'We cannot foresee the
system working adequately in a clinical context,' the letter said. 'It should
not be installed in any further hospitals. If it is not already too late,
there is a strong argument for withdrawing the care records service system
from this hospital.' Dr Paul Cundy, GPC IT subcommittee chair, said the faults
reported in Milton Keynes raised serious questions about the NHS care records
service project as a whole. A spokesperson for Connecting for Health denied
that the problems with Millennium would have a larger impact on the care
records service, but admitted there had been 'unacceptable problems' that
required 'immediate attention'. The other trusts at which Millennium has been
rolled out are Nuffield Orthopaedic,
Winchester, Buckinghamshire and
Weston. Staff at the Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre filed a serious untoward
incident after the system went live in December 2005, amid reports of delayed
treatments and lost patient records.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Pulse
20 April 2007
GPs set for
mass care record opt-out. GPs are gearing up for a confrontation over
electronic care records amid serious concerns over patient confidentiality.
Only a third of GPs plan to advise patients to allow their information to be
shared, an analysis of the first 250 responses to Pulse's medical ethics
survey reveals. GPs are similarly cautious with their own records - just a
third will allow full sharing, and four in 10 will opt out completely and
allow no data to be uploaded. The refusal to co-operate with the NHS Care
Records Service will pitch GPs into fresh conflict with ministers, who stand
accused of failing to take into account doctors' concerns over their ambitious
NHS IT programme. Pulse's survey found that despite a Government PR drive,
more than 80% of GPs still believe electronic care records threaten patient
confidentiality. Just 31% plan to advise patients to share information when
Summary Care Records are rolled out across England next year, and one in four
will advise against uploading any information at all. The findings will come
as a blow to Connecting for Health, which has stressed the need to win GPs
over.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Pulse
20 April 2007
NHS investment
achieves 'limited' success. Retired health minister Lord Warner has said
that the government's massive investment in the NHS hasn't delivered all the
improvements hoped for. He blamed a smaller than expected benefit from the
increased work force on "productivity" issues. He also attacked staff for
resisting change. "If you say 'have [staff] delivered all that you would have
liked them to deliver for that extra investment' then the frank answer for me is
'not as much as I would like to have seen'," he told Parliamentary Monitor
magazine. "They have done a lot of good things, but some of the productivity
issues which have been around in the NHS for such a long time need more work."
He also highlighted a lack of enthusiasm for the £12bn NHS computer upgrade.
"The idea that we could carry on with a paper-based NHS forever is nonsense, but
a lot of the staff have been very slow to embrace the idea that you could have
an electronic patient record and that you could move information about people
faster," he said. He insisted that the government's reforms were necessary and
would continue. "I can't tell you how many meetings I have been to with NHS
staff when they say 'why can't you ministers just stop this change and let us
get on with this perfect path ?' Well,
the truth is there has never been one of these perfect paths because health has
always continued to change and evolve as new treatments arrive and new demands
are made," he said. "One of the great frustrations has been trying to explain to
people the inevitability of change."
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Guardian
24 April 2007
Smartcard
loophole fears. Administrative staff in a Midlands PCT are logging on to
Choose and Book using GP practice access rights, in a loophole that practices
have warned could have implications for the NHS Care Records Service. Five
employees of Warwickshire PCT have a smartcard enabling them to access the
referral system, which is registered in the name of a local GP practice. Staff
accessing the system are able to view patient information, including why a GP
has referred a patient. Dr Paul Cundy, chair of the GPC IT subcommittee,
warned PCTs could use a similar workaround when Summary Care Records are
rolled out across England next year. 'It makes a nonsense of the so-called
access controls and audit trail,' he said. 'Choose and Book is a system that
is supposed to be secure and free of interference, but it's being worked
around in a variety of places and I dare say the same thing will happen to the
Summary Care Record.' Dr Paul Thornton, a GP in Warwickshire, said PCT staff
using GP practice access rights would lead to a loss of accountability. A
Connecting for Health spokesperson said the matter was 'an information
governance and business process matter for the PCT' and was 'not a system
security issue'.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Pulse
27 April 2007
Stormy waters
ahead as GPs rail at IT disasters. GP anger over IT issues looks set to
provoke debate at this year's LMCs' conference, which is destined to be one of
the stormiest in years. LMCs from across the country have submitted motions
outlining a catalogue of IT problems. Delegates will discuss a range of
controversial issues surrounding the National Programme for IT, including
problems with Choose and Book, patient confidentiality and the NHS Care
Records Service. Devon LMC alone has submitted three separate motions on the
topic. One states 'conference is disgusted at the billions of pounds of NHS
funds being poured into the current muddled IT program', while a second
demands an immediate end to Choose and Book referrals. The third calls for
patients to opt in rather than opt out from having a Summary Care Record, and
warns 'the public are sleepwalking into a medical confidentiality disaster
because the Government has downplayed real concerns'.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Pulse
27 April 2007
Hospitals
suffer in computer fiasco. Hospitals have been hit by 200 "major
incidents" in four months because of breakdowns in the NHS's £12bn computer
system, a report claims. The problems, affecting dozens of hospitals between
last October and January, led to doctors being unable to call up X-rays on
computer screens in wards and operating theatres, creating delays in
treatment. Some hospitals also lost access to records on appointments and
planned treatments. The report in Computer Weekly magazine is another blow to
the Government's scheme to centralise the records of 50m patients and link
30,000 GPs to 300 hospitals by 2012. MPs have warned that it is turning into
the "biggest disaster" in the world. Another glitch, in Manchester, led to
hundreds of inaccurate patient records being created every day last month
after a software upgrade.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Telegraph
8 May 2007
IT delays 'endangering patients'.
Patient safety across the NHS in England is being put at risk by long delays
in a £12bn programme to modernise IT systems, according to a study of opinion
among senior managers reported today by the British Medical Journal. The study
found that hospitals were left relying on outdated patient information systems
and some were considering buying interim programmes while they wait for the
agency responsible for IT procurement, Connecting for Health, to deliver on
its promises. John Carvel, social affairs editor
Thursday May 17, 2007 The Guardian
Main customer could thwart iSoft merger.
An audacious all-paper takeover of cash-strapped NHS software group iSoft by
much smaller Australian rival IBA Health could yet be blocked by the British
firm's largest customer. US firm Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC),
contracted to use iSoft's Lorenzo software package across 60% of hospitals in
England, has refused to back the deal. The British firm nevertheless
recommended the £132m all-share offer late on Tuesday night. A change of
control clause in CSC's contract with iSoft gives the US firm the right to
ditch the software provider from its NHS work. IBA executive chairman, Gary
Cohen, yesterday insisted he was "confident" of winning CSC's backing. The US
firm has made clear it must be convinced that the deal will enhance iSoft's
ability to deliver Lorenzo before sanctioning the deal. Simon Bowers
Thursday May 17, 2007 The Guardian
NHS upgrade at risk after IT firm's rescue bid is blocked.
The future of NHS software supplier iSoft was thrown into doubt yesterday
after a rescue takeover offer for the business was blocked. iSoft now has
until November to secure an urgent cash injection or go bust - a move that
could be calamitous for the government's £6.2bn NHS IT upgrade. iSoft last
month told investors it was recommending an all-share rescue offer from IBA
Health, a much smaller Australian rival. The proposed deal was to come with
new equity and debt to fund iSoft's urgent need for working capital. The deal
was effectively blocked yesterday by consultancy firm Computer Sciences
Corporation, which deploys iSoft's software under the government's troubled
National Programme for IT (NPfIT). CSC's contract with iSoft contains a
"change of control" clause which gives the US firm the right to ditch iSoft if
the business is sold. Simon Bowers
Wednesday May 30, 2007 The Guardian
iSoft bemused by rescue claim.
The
IT consultancy group blocking a rescue takeover of NHS software supplier iSoft
yesterday claimed it was in exploratory talks with the cash-strapped firm and
its lending banks over ways to "underpin its long-term financial stability".
Simon Bowers
Thursday May 31, 2007 The Guardian
IT delays putting patient safety at risk and the NHS is wasting 12% of IT
funds
. Senior NHS staff support IT
modernisation but say that continuing delays are putting patient safety at
risk, according to a study published on bmj.com.
Care and Health
31 May 2007
'Scandal' over
shredded reports. Civil servants have been ordered to destroy reports on
controversial, multi-billion-pound NHS and ID card computer projects in an
attempt to keep details of mismanagement from the public, it has been claimed.
The order, given to officials at the Office of Government Commerce (OGC), was
condemned by the Tories and Liberal Democrats, who accused the Government of
trying to hide details of bungled computer schemes. An official tribunal
upheld a decision that the documents should be disclosed after a Freedom of
Information Act request, but the OGC is appealing against the decision at the
High Court. Its paper tells civil servants to shred gateway review reports,
which are internal assessments of the projects. The reports are carried out by
independent specialists to monitor progress and assess the chances of success.
As well as the ID card report, another has been carried out on the NHS's
£12.4bn National Programme for IT. Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrats' shadow
chancellor, has tabled a Commons question demanding that a Treasury minister
explain why the order to shred documents was given. He said: "This is an
absolute scandal. The Information Commissioner has ruled that the Government
must divulge gateway reviews, which often identify major shortcomings and
incompetence in IT projects. For government departments now to be destroying
records, apparently under orders from the Treasury, is an absolute disgrace."
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Telegraph
4 June 2007
Ministers lose
grip on £14bn IT. Ministers are failing to keep a grip on Government
computer projects that cost the taxpayer up to £14bn a year, a report by MPs
warns. Senior officials running many of Whitehall's most "mission critical" IT
schemes have not even held a meeting with the minister responsible, the report
discloses. The high turnover of civil servants running such projects, and
their lack of experience, has led to damaging "discontinuity" and increased
the risk of cost over runs and delays. The report from the Commons public
accounts select committee follows a catalogue of costly problems with
Government IT projects, including new computer systems for the NHS and tax
credit systems. Many have gone billions of pounds over budget and are years
behind schedule. The MPs said that in one in five "mission critical and
high-risk" computer schemes, senior officials had not met the minister
responsible. It found that 70% of senior officials were concerned about the
lack of "programme and project management skills" within their departments.
There was also a disturbing turnover of staff involved in such schemes. More
than half of the senior officials in charge of IT projects were carrying out
the role for the first time.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Telegraph
5 June 2007
ISoft takes
legal action after takeover blocked. ISoft has begun legal action against
its largest customer after it refused to give its consent to a takeover bid
from the Australian software firm IBA Health. The Manchester-based software
company claimed that Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) had been working on
its own offer for months. ISoft claims that CSC is acting unreasonably by
blocking the deal. By initiating legal action, it hopes to force CSC to change
its position. In August, a leaked report conducted by CSC and Accenture found
there was "no believable plan" for the rollout of Lorenzo. Accenture pulled
out of the project, and its contracts were handed to CSC. The Financial
Service Authority began investigating "accounting irregularities" at iSoft
after its auditors found evidence that revenues from some contracts may have
been booked too early. There are concerns that the wider NHS IT upgrade could
be harmed by this series of problems, which culminated in iSoft putting itself
up for sale last October.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Guardian
5 June 2007
Health
service's IT surgeons. Paid £290,000, Richard Granger has had to withstand
a relentless tide of attacks on his 'National Programme for IT' to provide the
NHS with a range of computer systems. The value of the contracts he manages is
more than £7bn. He admits he has been fire-fighting crises for the past three
days. His chief concern is the future of software firm Isoft. This key
sub-contractor is being investigated for possible accounting irregularities
and is in the middle of a bitter takeover battle that threatens delivery
timetables. He wants the future of Isoft secure, to ensure that software
provider Cerner delivers glitch-free products and to see that the project
sails through a parliamentary health committee probe. The critics won't ease
off. Sources have suggested that the programme could be the biggest disaster
ever seen in a public IT project. Some believe that perhaps one of the three
main contractors, Fujitsu, CSC and BT, may be booking profits on work not yet
paid for, allegations that are unflinchingly rejected by Granger. He says that
BT, which has been chiefly responsible for building the spine of a system that
will allow patient records to be shared between GPs and hospitals, will reap
commercial dividends. Granger says that the firm's salesmen are jetting around
the world to persuade other governments to adopt it. Critics have seized on
the fact that Accenture had to pull out of the project last year, writing off
hundreds of millions of pounds. It has been claimed that Accenture wanted to
change its software provider, ISoft, but that Granger overruled that as it
would have led to ISoft's bankruptcy. Utterly untrue, says Granger. 'Accenture
found the job very difficult. It was futile persisting with them.' Maybe this
was no bad thing given Accenture's bungling of the outsourcing of Sainsbury's
IT systems. Asked about claims that IT firms are being rewarded for failure,
Granger counters that it's 'actually quite difficult to get paid on these
contracts', adding that contractors do not get their money until 45 days after
doctors and nurses are happy with the product. Granger believes the main
contractors aren't in it to make money but are genuinely interested in
improving the NHS. Time will tell whether he is right.
Summary by
Keep our NHS Public of Observer
10 June 2007
GPs blast
online patient records scheme. Four family doctors in the area have
slammed moves to extend an online patient records scheme which is being
piloted in the borough. They raised serious concerns about the security of the
system, which allows access by dozens of health professionals, as well as the
cost of the scheme which is part of the £12bn NHS computer upgrade. They are
also worried that it may put patients off visiting their doctor for fear of
their records being made public. One of the four, Dr John Tabor from the
Kilodnan House medical Practice in
Horwich, said: "There will be 250,000 people who will have access to these
records and even though they have been criminally checked, I just don't
believe there won't be the odd bad apple." Only 11 surgeries in Bolton have so
far signed up to the scheme - bringing 66,000 patients - but letters have been
sent to all other Bolton patients and it is expected they will be signed up by
the end of next summer.
Summary by
Keep o