Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

CQC launches public consultation on accessing patient records

The CQC has launched a public consultation asking for views on their processes for accessing medical records and other personal information.

The consultation comes in light of an update to the CQC’s Codes of Practice for accessing confidential material to make it clearer to inspectors, NHS staff and the public - including better reassurances that their personal info is handled ‘safely and appropriately at all times’.

The CQC can already use its regulatory powers to access patient medical records without gaining prior consent, and it is not proposing to change this practice.

In the consultation document, the CQC says that accessing confidential personal information ‘plays an essential role in CQC’s inspections’, explaining that this could for example mean going through a sample of medical records to check prescribing systems are in place.

It can access a patient’s medical or care records, or specific pieces of information about their physical or mental health, condition or treatments.

But it can also access and disclose information about a care provider’s social or family life; details of a care worker’s education, training and experience; and information about the sexuality, religious beliefs and racial or ethnic origin of a CQC employee.

The CQC is asking for views on whether the updated code of practice ’provides a consistent and lawful approach to obtaining, using, disclosing and handling confidential personal information across all areas of CQC’s work’.

It also asked whether it is ’clear and easy to follow, and fully explains why and how we may need to use people’s confidential personal information, and whether it reassures people that by following this Code, their information will be handled safely and appropriately at all times’.

The consultation queries: ’Having read the Code, how happy would you be for CQC to hold confidential personal information about yourself or members of your family?’

Respondents are asked to rate from 1-5 and, if not happy, asked to specify what their concerns are.

CQC chief executive David Behan said: ’Our aim in revising the code is to ensure that it provides clear and easy-to-follow guidance to support our staff in making lawful, ethical and appropriate decisions in relation to confidential personal information and that it tells people what they can expect from CQC in how we handle private information.

’The code has implications for people who use the services we regulate and for everyone who works in the care sector, so I would encourage you to take part.’

Readers' comments (5)

  • CQC chief executive David Behan said: ’Our aim in revising the code is to ensure that it provides clear and easy-to-follow guidance to support our staff in making lawful, ethical and appropriate decisions in relation to confidential personal information and that it tells people what they can expect from CQC in how we handle private information.

    The last line is meant to say 'in how we hand private companies your personal information'.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I think refusing unnecessary access to records by extraneous bodies is evidence to support "better reassurances that ... personal info is handled safely and appropriately at all times"

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The GP is the "data controller" under the DPA'98, and liable to be sued:
    "Data controllers must ensure that any processing of personal data for which they are responsible complies with the Act. Failure to do so risks enforcement action, even prosecution, and compensation claims from individuals." (Information Commissioner's Office)

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • andrew Field

    It would be great if you had published a link to the consultation. I for one will be writing to oppose. It is absolutely imperative that we can all speak to our GP without fear of mishandling of the information. As a GP potentially open to investigation I will be less likely to divulge important information to my own GP if I am struggling psychologically and seeking help. That is not acceptable. The sale of information to private organisations is also a concern. And to be paying more for the privilege is rubbing salt into the wounds. It's very difficult to remain at all positive about the process of regulation even though as a partner I can attest to some definite improvements in my surgery, although costly.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • andrew Field

    http://www.cqc.org.uk/content/code-practice-confidential-personal-information

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

IMPORTANT: On Wednesday 7 December 2016, we implemented a new log in system, and if you have not updated your details you may experience difficulties logging in. Update your details here. Only GMC-registered doctors are able to comment on this site.