On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 22:56:16 +0100, Michael Leuty <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>A year or so ago, Trefor opined that we had a duty not to keep computer
>records of patients who had left.
I think Trefor is wrong. Now and for the immediate future GP systems
won't allow FULL transfer of records including everything that might
be useful legally, e.g. the audit trail, so the only practical way to
preserve that data is for the previous GP to keep it. The time limits
for negligence cases are very long: 3 years after the patient became
aware of the issue for adults (which might be many years) and not
until after reaching adulthood for children. Keeping the information
for that length of time protects the doctor if there has not been
negligence and protects the patient if there has been negligence. Data
protection legislation allows us to keep information for as long as it
is needed and I believe the argument above justifies keeping it long
term.
>I have failed to do anything about this, because it is so useful having
>previous records when patients return to us. Students who return as
>temporary residents, or our floating population of disadvantaged folk,
>often with complex psychiatric histories. It is very useful to have
>access to what we wrote about them before. Such patients receive better
>care because we have not deleted their computer records, I believe.
Very true. For us this is a very common phenomenon.
David
--
Dr David G Evans
Cardiff
|