Clinicians at University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust are to obtain key patient information at the bedside from local GP practices via Healthcare Gateway’s Medical Interoperability Gateway.
The MIG, developed through a joint partnership between GP system suppliers EMIS and INPS, enables data sharing between GP systems and those of other providers such as hospitals, community units and social care.
The Morecambe initiative will allow doctors at the trust to check if a summary GP record is available and, with the permission of the patient, to access it.
They will use iPads running a modified version of the Lorenzo electronic patient record, for which the trust has been a high-profile early adopter.
Dr Colin Brown, clinical lead at the trust, believes that the system, which is currently live at one GP practice following a pilot, will improve the delivery of care, “making patient safety more efficient.”
“We want to invest in improving clinical performance,” he said. “We have been discussing with our GPs - such as Dr William Lumb, who shares the same view – how to provide information that follows the patients and supports their care.
“At the trust, we want to view the summary of care in the community so we can benchmark the care we provide, such as medication, to what patients have already received.”
Dr Lumb is NHS Cumbria’s chief clinical information officer, and a pioneer of more joined up care. His practice is set to be the next practice to share information with the acute trust via the MIG.
Dr Brown told eHealth Insider that the MIG will provide GPs with “reciprocal connectivity”; giving them access to important information about patients who receive treatment in casualty.
“What we want is a view of the summary care record in the community. Eventually, we would like to import the medication we give for the summary care record,” he added.
The MIG will also be “bolted” onto the trust’s ‘electronic postman’, which Morecambe hopes will allow the trust to deliver all discharge information to GPs electronically.
At the moment, the trust uses a secure file transfer protocol developed in-house to send approximately seven out of ten discharges electronically, with traditional methods such as letters and fax completing the process.
Steve Fairclough, head of informatics at Morecambe, said: “The Lorenzo deployment has given us a great foundation for us to improve and have a greater look at our interoperability.
“We have sent our discharges to GPs electronically in the past, but we have constantly looked for something better and more efficient and so we have integrated and bolted the MIG into our system.”
Morecambe currently straddles two primary care trusts and will be sharing patient information across what will soon become clinical commissioning groups in both the Cumbria and Lancaster and Morecambe regions.
The trust is in the process of putting sharing agreements in place with GP practices in the two areas, the majority of whom are currently using EMIS systems, with the rest migrating over the next 18 months.
The Morecambe Project was discussed at an IT conference in Manchester organised by the Informatics Skills Development Network in the North West. A fuller account of the event has now been published in Insight.
© 2012 EHealth Media.
MIG is not the SCRwilliamlumb 96 weeks ago
The SCR is limited currently to providing a copy view of drugs and allergy information available in the GP system. Data is extracted from the GP system and held in a central database. The MIG will provide both bi-directional clinical views and bi-directional authenticated clinical messaging (including documents) in a fully auditable format. In principle the GP practice could share via the MIG almost everything on the primary care record now-in practice a standard view has been developed with the filtering out of sensitive information e.g. Termination of Pregnancy.
For those of us deploying IT systems in the healthcare space-the cost of the software is often the cheapest (and easiest) part of the deployment plan. Good quality project managers cost money-and can only deploy systems that people want and confer benefit to a healthcare community. Convincing clinicans to change their working practices and/or share clinical information also provides significant challenge. It does not hold that either because the software has been centrally purchased and free that it should be used. I would much rather spend NHS monies on software that confers a tangible clinical benefit and can be part of a one system view of healthcare
Sincerely William Lumb
If I lived in Morecambe continued......davesandbach 96 weeks ago
Sorry I forgot to mention - if I lived in Morecambe and worked in one of the patient choice pilot areas and registered with a second practice in one of the following areas NHS Westminster, NHS Tower Hamlets and City & Hackney Teaching PCT in London; Manchester Teaching PCT and NHS Salford in Greater Manchester; and NHS Nottingham City I would be able to very tightly co-ordinate all GP's privilaged to help me with my health care understanding the actuality of my health status, the clinical decisions making of their opposite number and prescribing practice between both my home and away teams.
No prescription about me without me (nor the rest of my care network where ever they are in time or space.)
If I lived in Morecambedavesandbach 96 weeks ago
I would allow my GP to see my hospital records, my hospital consultant to see my GP records, both to see my Dental records, Ophthalmic Records and my own health monitoring records e.g. BP, weight and blood glucose charts. If I had a Social Care record they could see that also.
Since last week I control access to my integrated care records and no one else. The era of Citizen controlled care records has arrived chaps.
Retired NHS Acute Hospital CEO.
I use Health Vaultdavesandbach 95 weeks ago
I have loaded my hospital records, GP records, dental records and ophthalmic records plus some data I collect e.g. BP, blood sugar, weight etc. on to this site and store it in their document storage facility which I believe is as secure as the NHS SCR system if not more secure. I have a paper which you can have “Citizen Controlled Care Records” please email me for a copy eHealth21century@aol.com
Difference from SCR?jamesfone 96 weeks ago
Could someone explain to me how sharing the GP summary with hospitals differs from the Summary Care Record? (which UK taxpayers have already paid for)
Not to say that this project isn't useful or a useful platform for eventual two-way sharing, but that all trusts should already have this facility via a national solution? Provided the local GPs supply the information.
I'm sure there is a difference, but the article doesn't describe what it is. Anyone know?
Missing the Point GalenNHSCIO 96 weeks ago
Yes, web access to *some* GP systems is available, what the MIG does is concentrate access to all systems into a single point. The ease of the MIG is the key and also the fact that patients and GP's can choose what to share. Web access to a system is a poor mans poor relation and not a long term viable solution. I saw Dr Lumb's presentation in Penrith and saw the MIG linked into Lorenzo and it looked a good example of systems integration
Can patients have access to MIGdavesandbach 95 weeks ago
If I lived in the Morecambe area could I as a patient have online access to the single point (is it called MIG?) holding my health information? If the answer is no how would you deal with a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act i.e. would you provide me with an electronic copy of the information in the MIG or would you insist that it be provided in a paper format. Will the system connect to my data held in the social care system run by the Local Authority?
Is that all?!Galen 96 weeks ago
Gosh it is 2012 and there is a big 'news story' about sharing of information between GPs and Acute care. This has been going on via web access to systems for some time, I find it depressing something so basic is heralded as a big success story in this day and age.
Galen, the problem is AcuteMary Hawking 96 weeks ago
Isn't the "big news story" about the good work put in by Morecombe Bay and NHS Cumbria in linking up two systems and using mobile technology to do so? along with the information governance issues they have addressed?
I agree that there are other instances using different mechanisms: which were you thinking of, and what is the comparison in terms of the organisations, EHRs and clinical governance involved?