Sir Bruce Keogh is the Medical Director of the NHS in England. He has said that IT will "completely change the way we deliver medicine" because he now wants doctors to be able to hold online consultations using Skype. This will revolutionise the NHS reports the Telegraph.
Has Sir Bruce suddenly woken up to the benefits of modern technology?
The NHS in Scotland has been 'revolutionised' for some time now. Healthcare provision in some of Scotland's more remote communities, such as Orkney and Shetland, has included the use of video link consultations with doctors and nurses based in Aberdeen. "Tele-health" provides effective high quality care using a range of digital technologies. Remote clinics and post-surgical follow-up appointments can also be conducted by video-conferencing and currently it is being tested to see if it can be used safely and effectively for patients with motor neuron disease in their own homes. This allows specialist doctors to support the patient whenever their advice is required without either of them having to travel.
For the past couple of years my own GP is happy to speak to me by telephone rather than have me clutter the waiting room - a win-win situation. Also I can book an appointment or a repeat prescription through my GP's website. Feedback is also welcomed.
Using video-link technology can significantly reduce a patient's anxiety and reduce lengthy hospital journeys. At Ninewells hospital in Dundee most people's stress levels must rise long before they reach the consultant's waiting room because parking is a nightmare.
After spending £billions on various IT systems the English NHS has finally decided to catch up with Scotland's innovative system? About time too and such a shame people have been denied this facility for so long.
Of course here in Scotland we are fortunate to have a most capable and forward thinking health secretary in Nicola Sturgeon. Communication technology has been available for years yet was never introduced into the healthcare system until Ms Sturgeon grasped the reins. Now it is accepted practice and can only benefit both patient and doctor.
The chief executive of England's Patients Association isn't too keen on the idea though:
''We would be concerned that it could translate to more frustration for patients. People are already concerned that they are spending less time with their GP and we wouldn't want this to be a way of reducing that further. It should always be the choice of the individual.'
Quite a negative response from someone who should be embracing advances in patient care. Maybe she would change her mind if she took a wee sail to Shetland.
Posts
20 comments:
I think the idea is brilliant for isolated individuals and communities without a doctor.
But unfortunately, every time that technology has been introduced to the NHS in England, things have gone backwards.
I can order repeat prescriptions from my doctor on-line; it takes 72 hours before I can collect the pills. If I go to the surgery in the morning the receptionist will print out the prescription there and then and whist I might have to wait maybe 15 minutes for the doctor to be free to check and sign it, I can then go next door to the chemist and by the time I've been to get my newspaper, its ready.
Similar problems when my wife tried to book a scheduled hospital appointment; the web site was horrendous and in the end she had to resort to the phone.
I would hate to have a consultation with my GP using NHS technology, I wonder how long it would take to get and on-line appointment, and whether it would go through some third party like the prescriptions do?
Oh and did you see the report today? NHS Spin Doctors are paid more than top consultants! Shows the priorities
Our surgery has an automated booking and check in service before you see a doctor so I suppose skype will remove all human contact with the medical profession for patients.
Skype isn't very secure though so it's probably not a safe way to talk about your really personal problems. Billions of people can log in and enjoy the show :)
£1,624 - the gap in public spending per person between England and Scotland
subrosa those knobheads at the tory diary are raising the vote for Independence exponentially as i write
Skype isn't very secure though so it's probably not a safe way to talk about your really personal problems. Billions of people can log in and enjoy the show
Sorry, but that is nonsense. Absolute nonsense.
Luckily people like Nicola Sturgeon can see beyond that. Government projects tend to fail because they are bespoke and in-house. Using tried and tested third party specific applications is the way forward and things like this are to be applauded.
If only other parts of the world (like mine) were as forward thinking.
ASE..
"Sorry, but that is nonsense. Absolute nonsense"
Sadly it's not nonsense. Have you researched the skype technology ? Read the reports on it's password security ? Vulnerability to vishing, spoofing and certain worms ?
Any web service is vulnerable and will never be as secure as chatting face to face in a surgery. NHS security like all public sector security is very poor. Connecting it to 3rd party applications won't make it any more secure.
Some sources...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/16/skype-security-weaknesses-vulnerable
https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/skype-called-answer-mounting-security-concerns
http://gizmodo.com/5826603/facebook+skype-security-exploit-can-compromise-your-system
http://www.silicon.com/legacy/research/specialreports/voipsecurity/0,3800013656,39166609,00.htm
Have you researched the...
I am happy to be pulled up about my opinions on anything. Devolution? Hanging? My opinions are just opinions.
But this is my job so in this one single area I claim absolute advantage on the battlefield I'm afraid.
Any web service is vulnerable and will never be as secure as chatting face to face in a surgery.
A simplistic comment depending on what *you* regard as 'vulnerable'. Coupled with your comment easily countered by someone listening from another desk, notes in a book or brainwave leakage if you aren't wearing your (obviously needed) tinfoil hat.
Really? Are you serious?
And then you ignore my comment about in-house systems deliberately so that you can muddy the waters linking them with 3rd party....sigh...
Not really your area, no?
It's not really my area ASE although I've been building computers from scratch for about 20 years and have loaded and tested a lot of different software. I have skype but would only use it for chit chat. I wouldn't speak about anything personal or anything to do with security. I read all the usual magazines and online security sites and Symantec said it wasn't safe for business.
The security is only as good as the weakest user. And as you must be aware most folk don't seem to be concerned with their security. I wasn't trying to muddy the waters with in house and 3rd party. Just stating a fact.
Oh ferchrissakes:
Some sources...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/16/skype-security-weaknesses-vulnerable
That well known hacking resource site and tech guru The Guardian.
Really.
And put your tinfoil hats on for those kooks at:
https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/skype-called-answer-mounting-security-concerns
If you know anything about that site you know they are UFO and 9/11 freaks. Just read the paranoid "my girlfriend hacked me" comments on that very thread for proof of stupiditude.
http://gizmodo.com/5826603/facebook+skype-security-exploit-can-compromise-your-system
Yay! You've linked to a reputable site this time. Trouble is it talks about an obscure problem when you use Skype and Facebook together...that was already fixed before the article was written.
And finally...
http://www.silicon.com/legacy/research/specialreports/voipsecurity/0,3800013656,39166609,00.htm
...has got to be one of the most spectacularly make-your-ears-bleed bit of crapola I've read for years.
Full of scaremongering and fatuous advice like "keep your password secret" and "don't talk to strangers"
Look, I've realised by this point (to my annoyance) that you've Googled a few crappy links and not even read them. I have done, and frankly I am now furious that I did and you didn't.
You know nothing about this. Quit whilst you are behind only this badly.
I've been building computers from scratch for about 20 years and have loaded and tested a lot of different software.
*sigh*
I have skype but would only use it for chit chat. I wouldn't speak about anything personal or anything to do with security.
Each to their own. But your personal ideas are your own. Up to you. Some people worship rocks.
I read all the usual magazines and online security sites
I'd have been looking for a list of professional qualifications there instead, but ho hum.
and Symantec said it wasn't safe for business.
Aaargh. Kill me now.
The security is only as good as the weakest user. And as you must be aware most folk don't seem to be concerned with their security.
All obvious, yes.
I wasn't trying to muddy the waters with in house and 3rd party.
That is precisely what you tried to do. Re-read your own comment in reply to mine compared with what I said.
With my apologies at this stage but I'm going to have to duck out of this one now. I have another 7 hours in the office in my timezone ahead doing...ummm...firewall and intrusion prevention/detection stuff.
Saw your reply before you deleted it...and I'm sorry to have caused offence but this topic is my thing. This is what I do. I know this stuff to a really freaky level.
And I'm also sorry you saying it has put you off reading my stuff'n'nonsense blog filled with random musings. I never talk about my industry or any tech over there.
Honestly you should look into this more closely. It's not the way you fear it is.
No worries ASE. You obviously know more about internet security than me.
Sorry about the comment ;)
I do seem to be a moaning beggar these days and will try to be friendlier.
Oh and keep reading your blog.
Hi RM and ASE,an interesting discussion. Communications security has interested me for many years as something that that I had to be aware of in my job ,but thankfully was not directly responsible for.
Most people,I think in private life, if they use common sense will be unlikely to have a problem as apart from financial matters, and we have all been told how to safe guard ourself there, who really cares about what we say. If you are naughty and attract attention, the monitoring means that can be deployed will get you for sure.
Even talking to someone in the middle of a cricket pitch wont protect you.Who cares what you tell your doctor apart from your life insurance salesman!
You have a different system for repeat prescriptions than here EP. I can't just walk into the surgery and get a print out. It's a 72 hour wait the same as the online system.
I don't mind at all using the phone to speak to my GP if we both think it's not necessary for me to attend the surgery.
No I didn't see that but we shouldn't be surprised should we?
I know little about Skype security RM but I would have thought it not too bad.
Surely getting the problems dealt with either physically face to face or technically face to face is what matters.
Hi Niko, yes I did read that. Not worth a post really is it?
Ah ASE, glad to hear my own thoughts about Skype are near the mark.
Geez RM, secure face to face chatting? Maybe so but your NHS records aren't secure. I only found out yesterday that I have a few records: my GP's and one each with both 'local' hospitals. N'er the three will meet either unless I happen to mention something. Marvellous.
Thanks ASE and RM, your conversation goes to show just how 'brainwashed' us non-techies are about security ASE.
Now, I know you said you never write about security at your place ASE, but I think it would be of interest to many to share a bit of your expert knowledge and take the frighteners off so much of the rubbish we read.
Post a Comment