And here's a case that may hinge on responsibilities:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3612261.stm
"A jury heard on Thursday that a hospital consultant ordered a crucial
test, which was never carried out, four months before Robbie died.
Professor Ieuan Hughes told the jury he would have carried out the
test"
Jonathan
On 7 Apr 2004, at 21:27, Jonathan Kay wrote:
> Isn't the issue one of responsibility rather than medium?
>
> The organisation needs to decide how it wants to manage retrieval and
> interpretation of the results of investigations requested by
> clinicians on patients under the care of the organisation. It needs
> policies that describe how this is to be carried out, and how it will
> record what has happened.
>
> Relevant questions would be:
> * What happens if a request is lost on the way to the laboratory?
> * What happens if no-one looks at a report?
> * What happens if a paper report is lost in transit?
> * What happens when care is transferred from one clinician to another
> (that's about every eight hours in the near future)?
>
> Knowing that "Most reports are looked at electronically" seems to be a
> long way below that duty of care.
>
> This is "clinical governance" or "risk management", not "IT" or
> "medical records". I would seriously recommend getting legal advice,
> and you won't often hear me say that.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> On 7 Apr 2004, at 12:04, Brian Shine wrote:
>
>> An interesting situation has arisen at one of the hospitals I cover.
>>
>> It is proposed that biochemistry, haematology and microbiology
>> reports on
>> in-patients should be filed in the notes without a medical signature.
>> The
>> reasoning is as follows:
>> Most reports are looked at electronically.
>> The paper reports take a long time to reach their destination.
>> There are too many of them for the doctors to look at properly, and
>> there
>> are, for instance, filing cabinets full of unfiled reports in MAU.
>> There are mechanisms (at least in Biochemistry) for phoning results
>> that
>> fall outside action limits.
>>
>> What do other members think of these proposals? If this is adopted,
>> what
>> are the legal implications?
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Brian Shine
>>
>> ------ACB discussion List Information--------
>> This is an open discussion list for the academic and clinical
>> community working in clinical biochemistry.
>> Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed
>> via the internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and
>> they are responsible for all message content.
>>
>> ACB Web Site
>> http://www.acb.org.uk
>> List Archives
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
>> List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
>
------ACB discussion List Information--------
This is an open discussion list for the academic and clinical
community working in clinical biochemistry.
Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed
via the internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and
they are responsible for all message content.
ACB Web Site
http://www.acb.org.uk
List Archives
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
|