|
GP columnist Neil Paul has triggered an interesting debate about the future of primary care IT; and healthcare IT more generally. He notes that there are some oddities in the current market, with systems being paid for by one set of people – central government, local commissioning bodies – but used by another – GPs and other primary care staff – on behalf of yet another – patients.
This, he suggests, has some unfortunate effects, since incumbent suppliers are naturally inclined to respond to the demands of their paymasters, rather than their users. But it may also have some unfortunate long-term effects, if this focus leads them to miss changing user demands that newer, more nimble operatives can come in and meet.
|
|
For instance, he notes that NHS policy is pushing for more integrated working, for GPs to open longer through federated working, and for more efficient ways for patients to carry out routine monitoring, booking, and follow-up. Yet integration remains incredibly hard, incumbent suppliers have barely started on the federation challenge, and many of the good ideas for improving interactions with patients are coming from start-ups.
As things stand, and despite NHS England’s best efforts, if suppliers want to make integration difficult, or keep out new entrants keen to plug and play with their systems, they can. But Neil argues that in the end they will have to choose to evolve or die. What’s your bet on what will happen?
|
Editorial
