This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

Gold, incentives and meh

GPC chair says shared patient records are increasing workloads

GPs are seeing more patients as an ‘unintended consequence’ of the NHS's integrated patient records system, according to the chair of the BMA's GP Committee.

GPC chair Dr Richard Vautrey said the system, which allows GPs and hospitals to share information with one another, has led to secondary care services redirecting patients to practices to explain their hospital test results.

Speaking as part of an event at the Labour Party conference last week, Dr Vautrey said he had seen this happening in Leeds - where he practises  - because GPs can provide the results more quickly than hospitals.

Commissioners in Leeds say they are 'not aware' of patients being redirected, but will speak with practices to investigate the problem.

Leeds became the first city to share GP patient records across the healthcare system in October last year, more commonly known in the area as the Leeds Care Record.

GP Connect – an NHS Digital programme – underpins the Leeds system and allows hospitals to share and view patient information and data with GP practices and vice versa.

During a fringe meeting at the Labour conference on 23 September, which looked at the use of technology in primary care, Dr Vautrey said the system is a ‘step forward’, but also warned of the unintended consequences of more work for GPs.

He said: ‘It’s a step forward from where we’ve been before and it is a greater integration of information from practice point of view or a particular hospital point of view.

‘They can see information on our systems in a way that they couldn’t before. They’re able to see patients in hospital settings in a better way as well.'

He added: 'It does have unintended consequences, shall we say. It means now I can see all of the results from the hospital.

‘What’s happening now is patients, when they ring the hospital for their results, they’re being directed to their GP to get the hospital results as we can provide them quicker than the hospital. So you end up seeing a few more patients than you would have.’

A spokesperson for Leeds CCG said: 'In Leeds, we take a citywide approach to digital developments like the Leeds Care Record and work closely with colleagues across the health and care system to help make sure that the tools and applications we develop meet their needs and are used effectively.

'We’re not aware, either from data or feedback, that hospitals are referring patients to their GPs to get their results.'

They added: 'However, we appreciate the concerns of LMC members and will talk to practices to find out more and look at what we can do to address any issues.'

Also speaking at the the Labour Party conference was RCGP chair Professor Stokes-Lampard, who voiced concerns about the non-pharmaceutical supply chain in the event of a no-deal Brexit, and said it could lead to surgery closures if practices run out of basic supplies.

Readers' comments (13)

  • Nothing to do with shared records - it happens to us ans we are not in Leeds !
    What is more, hospital depts routinely tell patients to seek results from GP before we get access to them, causing patients to complain about us, when it is the hospital's fault they are not ready yet!
    (AND not our job to explain for the requesting clinician, who is being so rude in not doing it themselves).
    Is GMC doing anything about it???

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Who would you pressurise for your results- big scary hospital or nice friendly GP. We are our own worst enemy. But no one is interested in reducing our workload because we’re “free”.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • it is all here, they just have to read it.
    https://www.england.nhs.uk/patientsafety/wp-content/uploads/sites/32/2016/03/discharge-standards-march-16.pdf

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page

Have your say