The clinical director for the Summary Care Record has called for a period of reflection in the wake of the publication of the independent evaluation of the SCR.
Dr Gillian Braunold, clinical director for the SCR and HealthSpace, said that while the SCR team was keen “to try and get on with this” it was also important to carefully consider all the issues that had been raised.
She told EHI Primary Care: “I think it’s one of the most balanced reports I’ve seen. People will take polarised views and pick their choice phrases but it is important to try and read it as a whole.”
It has been suggested that the final published version of the report had been toned down from the draft. However this is rejected by Professor Trisha Greenhalgh, the lead author of the report from University College London.
She told EHI Primary Care: “The level of criticism was not toned down. Certain phrases were removed because they were seen as "press bait", but the essential message about CFH – that we questioned its preferred change model and ways of working – was not changed at all.”
Professor Greenhalgh said the two most important messages to take from the report were that it was a complex situation and that it was important not to oversimplify the complexity so that there could be a much-needed public debate.
Dr Braunold said the SCR team would be making recommendations to the SCR Advisory Group, made up of a range of stakeholders, on the back of the report’s findings.
In the mean time early adopter PCTs will continue to upload records on to the spine ahead of any changes to the consent model or other aspects of the programme.
Dr Braunold welcomed the evaluation team’s recommendation that the programme should look at a ‘consent to view’ model which would enable patients to give or withhold their consent at every encounter.
“It would give a breadth of control to patients,” she said.
Related articles