The importance of sharing healthcare data

The UK has healthcare data on 65m people. That’s a phenomenal amount of information and, as a nation, we are only just beginning to work out what we can achieve with it. But big data is one thing; ordinary data is another. We all have data; we are learning how valuable it is, and now we have to begin to share it.

In the UK, we’re historically inclined to resist information sharing. We must be one of the few European countries not to have identity cards. This doesn’t make sense when we share so much on social media. In fact, having identity cards would make more sense because then we could limit what information we share. And we’re also pathologically resistant to sharing our health data, despite the fact that it could deliver countless benefits if we did.

This isn’t just an individual bias; it’s also an institutional issue. Although most people think the NHS is one big national health service, it’s actually a group of di erent health trusts, ALBs, quangos and more that make up our medical provision. Each one has autonomy over its spending and decision on technology, with little national oversight.

So, as a GP in the north of England, we store our health records on two systems. There are a multitude of

Dr Patrick Wynn

so ware add-ons and they come and go. Some are designed to optimise prescribing; some are designed to identify patients at risk; some add-ons are designed for accounting. Our principle system is SystmOne. There are a few others, but the problem is that they don’t communicate with each other.

This means that if a patient from one practice arrives at another practice, the doctors cannot see the patient history. That’s just madness. And the really big failure of communication is between di erent health care providers in terms of primary care, secondary care and the independent sector, none of whom have a common system.

In a hospital, there might be a laboratory that does cardiac scans with a scan machine that comes with its own so ware. The so ware will produce a report, but it has no mandatory requirement to directly communicate with the GP system or the hospital systems. As the patient’s GP, I cannot see it. But the patient assumes that I can, so I have to request it and this all takes time. And as we know, time is of the essence when it comes to medical symptoms.

Again, as a gynaecologist, when I sit as a specialist in a hospital, if I decide that a patient needs a tablet,

I specify a tablet and dose, dra a letter which is sent, albeit electronically these days, to the GP. Someone reads the letter and manually enters the data onto the patient’s notes in the computer system. This is pure duplication - I could have entered that data on a single system and not needed to waste anybody else’s time. And I could have typed up my own records and there would be no letters to be sent, no opportunity for losing information or sending it to the wrong place. It would be so much more productive.

The golden opportunity for newer healthcare systems

From birth, every person in the UK is allocated a GP. This dates from the founding of the NHS back in 1948. It’s a di erent world today and everyone should be able to hold their own patient record on their phone, allowing them to opt in and out of sharing, access appointments, results and see their own health data.

If someone comes into the surgery or hospital unconscious, as a doctor I should be able to access their medical records to see if they have any allergies or other issues. But I can’t. So other countries should take a look at the issues the UK has, as they have huge potential to be overcome. There’s an inordinate amount of productivity gains that they would have over the current NHS operating systems.

I don’t advocate one system holding all records, just a common language that means all data can be accessed whatever system it is stored on. Rather like the internet allows us to book a hotel on the other side of the world, no matter what operating system we use. The patient gives permission for their data to be used and they can be treated quickly and e ectively with less risk. The clinicians or provider can treat the patient immediately, confident they have all the requisite knowledge to do so. It’s as simple as that – and there are companies out there that have the solutions to do this.

In some countries patients can self-source specialists. But if they see a consultant for one issue, and a di erent one for another issue, is there a mechanism for the records to be combined? How much easier it would be if there was one central place to find such vital information.

I speak from the heart as an overworked and underresourced UK GP. Yet I do have experience and I hope my thoughts and insight are valuable. I hear that the Middle East health authorities are looking at primary care seriously as a gatekeeper for secondary care. Our role as GPs is to deliver preventative care, ensuring that appropriate cases are referred. With carefully curated systems, the Middle East could deliver the ideal primary care system that would be the envy of more established systems in other parts of the world.