NPfIT (again)

Actually, computer says: 'Go on - have all the data you want!'

Well all those reassurances are going up in smoke aren’t they? £12-20 billion going up in smoke. A massive computer system that isn’t safe, and doesn’t do what it needs to do. It has been evaluated, and found wanting.

It’s ever so popular a project as shown by Bolton PCT’s experience. Even their staff did not want to use a health 'myspace' system. Or maybe they did not trust its safety? Seems many patients don’t either.

Perhaps they are right not to in light of this report .

NPfIT: an update

All I can say is: thank fuck Labour aren't in charge of the breweries as well.......

At the Ranting House we are far from convinced about the effectiveness or safety of the National Programme for IT (NPfIT) (or Connecting for health (CfH) if you prefer its new name. Windscale or Sellafield…does it make it any better?)

However new reports in the magazine Pulse, are showing the wheels coming off even further. Staff are leaving in droves, following the example of the malignant Mr Granger last year. And the government’s chief information officer Matthew Swindells is going soon too. They are advertising for another, but Lady Bracknell will haunt the appointment. To paraphrase, “To lose one CIO is poor, to lose two begins to look careless.”

Meanwhile “evaluations” are being delayed, by up to two years although their results are being “anticipated”

Oh well, it all makes work to spend £20 billion of taxpayer’s money on. We wonder who they’ll consult to get them out of this hole?

GPs currently would happily bury this government in its hole, and we have yet to see any benefit from CfH in practice.

Oh and government data security is about as effective as the Maginot Line.

This statist government is serving up another New Labour disaster- the combination of high cost with low effectivenes. Poor value whatever tax band you are in. Oh and all ladled out with grand promises, sweeping arrogance, contempt for what has gone before, and total ignorance of what is necessary.

A Table for One at The Trough Ms Fuckwit?

Equality of Opportunity - that's the best thing about New Labour's New Britain. It seems that being a totally clueless fucktard with the world's most patronising tone of voice in now no longer an impediment to getting your nauseating snout stuck into the trough and filling your pockets.

This is demonstrated perfectly by the news that The Rt Hon Patsy Fuckwit, the erstwhile worst ever Secretary of State for Health and Rover-busting Trade and Industry, has been given a cushy little part-time director job with BT worth £60,000 per year. Of course the fact that BT was awarded billions of pounds worth of contracts by government departments that she was in charge of at the time has absolutely nothing to do with it does it?

The fact that NHS IT has gobbled up Billions and Billions of pounds worth of tax payer's money without being noticed by a single member of the front line NHS staff is by-the-by.

Have a look at this story in the Register that one of our correspondents kindly drew our attention to.

Sixty Thousand Free Sausages, sizzling in a pan....

The woman is a fucking walking disaster with little to recommend her except for expensive dentistry. If I were a shareholder of BT, I'd be very worried indeed.....

Government IT fiasco (again)

A bit delayed and ever so slightly over-budget: Another government IT triumph

Again, and again, and again. Well today we have finally found one civil servant is honourable enough to resign after a massive cock up.

We now know that the government is fundamentally incapable of managing data securely and safely.

What will this mean for ID cards? What about Connecting for Health and the privacy of your medical records or MTAS and its great computer security?

This government’s reputation for competence crumbles quicker than Northern Rock’s solvency.

Would you still trust this lot with anything?

Victim of ChoiceTM

Dr Rant hasn't been altogether enthusiastic about the Government's NHS computerised fuckwittery in the past, and 'Choose and Book' has rapidly become the bane of a GP's life in it's hitherto brief existence. On a good day, with a following wind and a slice of luck off the tee, Choose and Book adds only about 5 minutes to the process of referring a patient to a specialist. It doesn't actually offer any more 'choice' than the patient had before really (the 5% of people who don't want to 'go local' know where they want to go anyway), and in fact it actually reduces real 'choice' by preventing the GP referring a patient to a specific, named consultant (a universal freedom enjoyed before New Labour made the world a better place by inventing Choice^TM).

Until recently, I hadn't actually considered what it was like to be one of the patients who had been wrung through the electronic mangle that is Choose and Book. I had always assumed that they had left with the piece of paper showing a telephone phone number and their super secret password, and a been able to book their appointment over the phone before their cup of tea had gone luke warm.

One of Dr Rant's patients has kindly given him an insight into the Choose and Book experience by copying him in on a letter of complaint that he penned (after the diazepam prescription to calm him down). It is safe to say that a few chuckles were raised during the weekly practice meeting, and we have a new entry at number one on our 'favorite patients top 40 chart'.

Here are a few 'choice' excerpts:

After several phone calls I successfully arranged an appointment at Hospital X

A week later I received an undated letter telling me that this appointment had been cancelled "due to unforeseen circumstances" and that "a new appointment will be sent to me". The explanation is pure government bureaucrat-speak which tells the poor patient nothing - and which is, one assumes, the intention.

I then received a letter offering me an appointment at Hospital Y. No mention was made of Hospital X, my preferred 'choice'. When I phoned for an explanation I was told that Hospital X does not offer the service I need.

Why give me an appointment at Hospital X if they don't provide the service? And if a mistake has been made why not offer me a straightforward explanation?

I then received another appointment, this time for Hospital X which, as you'll see above, does not offer the service. Which of these two appointments would you prefer me to attend?

I have a lifetime's experience of dealing with mindless bureaucracies and this one takes the biscuit. My complaint is not about your very courteous staff, but about your system which, I invite you to agree, is horribly defective. How do seriously ill or confused patients cope with it?

To cap it all, several weeks after this started, I have now received another letter, signed by you, berating me for not having booked my appointment yet!

At present I have only copied this letter to my GP. Before advising a wider audience of the major shortcomings in the way the 'Choose & Book' system operates I would welcome your comments.

If only all are patients had 'anger management issues' like the Dr Rant Team, life would be even more fun!

Would You Still Trust This Lot (2)?

Kaiser Permanente: Bunch of Cowboys?

Kaiser Permanente are an American health provider who look to computers to help them care for patients. Just like the NHS system it seems the same old flaws of security and reliability plague it. Nice to see it isn't just the UK that has these problems.

And then the UK government’s system for registration of hatch, match and dispatch falters.

Meanwhile the NHS health informatics site is down as MTAS continues to be. There are still significant concerns over its security This week we have seen the farce of personnel officers in the NHS not knowing (nor being able to find out) which doctor should be coming to which interview! There are serious concerns that there may not be enough junior doctors in post for the August change round.

Garth Marenghi on Devil’s Kitchen posts a superb article about NPunFIT for any purpose Richard Granger’s casual dismissal of people with a concern for the privacy of the doctor-patient encounter as “Privacy Fascists” is surely evidence of Mr Granger’s unfitness for purpose.

More news about “minor inaccuracies” here Also some inaccuracies go undetected for years as the Scotsman reported in January.

Ann Treneman beautifully sums up the malfunction of Patsy Hewitt.

All in all who can we trust to keep our personal medical information accurately and safely on computers? Certainly not the team at NHS Completely fucking hopeless!

Would you still trust this lot?

So Patricia Hewitt gets dragged back to the House of Commons yet again after Crippen and Channel 4 act to expose glaring breaches of security on the Medical Training Application Scheme website. Crippen covers the saga well. If you want to discover the identifying details of junior doctors (fancy a spot of identity fraud perhaps?) you could have done so last week at MTAS. As I write the site is till down (2105 1.5.07) The Tories are onto Hewitt in the House and it is hard to see how see retains even a residue of credibility.

Now following on from this we need to ask:-

If the security on this government database is so slack, what makes you think it will be any better on other government computer systems?


And in the NHS we have the impending disaster that is Connecting for Health.This scheme has been widely criticised on grounds of cost,
inability to function properly, delays, leadership problems.

There are concerns about confidentiality that have never properly been answered

In Doctor today (1.5.07) Granger is quoted as saying, “the consultation on these aspects (confidentiality and the electronic patient record) has gone on far longer than was originally scheduled” The NHS computer system is being designed in classic consultoid style, (See David Craig's book) being imposed top down with minimal involvement of clinicians. No one has asked GPs, hospital doctors, nurses, pharmacists or hospital managers what they would like from a new computer system. Even the RCGP (nearly always the nicest and mildest of medical commentators) comments, “There was inadequate engagement with clinicians in the early stages of the National Programme for IT. It is to be hoped that this mistake is not perpetuated.”

The MTAS debacle over basic IT management and data security (Ignoring for now it’s disastrous effects as a personnel selection system) gives the lie to government assurances over its ability to manage personal data securely.

Do you still want them to have your records on the NHS spine? If you can see what’s happening it’s time to 93C3 your medical record.