Mary - why are you not surprised that iSoft is first and Emis last? This is the first time that iSoft has EVER been first to my knowledge!
As far as I know it is open to each supplier to book slots when they anticipate being ready. Due to a very happy alliance with Informatica, iSoft were ready with almost indecent speed - and that is why they were first!
John
On 08/01/07, Mary Hawking <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
<Rant>
Is anyone else as fed up as I am about the constant changing of QOF
rules so late in the year that it will be impossible to achieve any sort
of reasonable score this year?
In view of the government's determination to claw back money from
primary care, it does make me wonder whether this is deliberate rather
than the expected incompetence on the part of - who? Those agreeing the
rules? CfH? NHSEmployers/GPC?
We have had 3 changes in the rule set - the last and most extensive
being in December 2006 - applicable, of course, from 1.4.06.
There is then a delay while the GP system suppliers write the software
for their systems - and a further delay while CfH allocates slots for
conformance testing.
(Does anyone know how the order is decided? Why am I not surprised that
iSoft appears to have been first - and EMIS probably last?)
*In addition* , I have another problem which is not universal - but not
uncommon.
Our local labs are refusing to release eGFRs - despite having been
instructed to from 1.4.06.
This means that we have - officially - *no way* of classifying patients
as having CKD (Chronic Kidney Disease) 3, 4 or 5 as this is supposed to
depend on having 2 values below 60 ml/min at least 3 months apart.
We are now within 3 months of the end of the year - and there is
National Prevalence Day in February...
What is a conscientious GP supposed to do?
I could calculate every eGFR when the serum creatinine result is
received using an Internet MORD calculator, and repeat the serum
creatinine on those with eGFRs less than 60 in 3 months.
Or
I could say that I am unable to evaluate my patients for CKD unless
their serum creatinine is raised by normal values
Or
I could use the search provided by my system supplier (EMIS) - which
seems to be the best option but does not allow for local variations in
the lab values due to different methods.
Yes, my PCT (or rather previous PCT *has* asked for guidance from the
QMAS team - but never received an answer!
</rant>
Thank you for listening - if you have - ranting - although futile - *is*
therapeutic!
Anyone got any views? Cockup or conspiracy?
Mary Hawking
Harassed senior and QOF partner.. For my sins
--
Mary Hawking