Home > PJ (current issue) > Letters | Search

PJ Online homeThe Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 278 No 7435 p73
20 January 2007

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 80K, Acrobat Reader

Letters

• Adverse drug events
• Patient data
• Methadone
• The Society (5)


Letters to the Editor

Patient data

What goes around comes around

From Mr A. M. Crabbe, FRPharmS

I write regarding the ongoing debate surrounding the NHS record database, when it has been suggested that patients might need to opt in or opt out, whichever option is finally agreed by a wavering government.

It has also been suggested by some members of the medical profession and, indeed, by politicians of all parties that the risks associated with such a project in relation to confidentiality are considerable, since it has been implied that the database will be fairly easy to access by a moderately skilful hacker.

Within the debate, I have heard mention on several occasions that the possible use of “smart cards” would be a better way forward, with the patient retaining the card and thereby deciding who would have access to the data, doing away with the need for a huge, vulnerable central database and presumably reducing some of the capital cost.

Work in the mid 1980s, undertaken by the Welsh School of Pharmacy in conjunction with the Taff Vale GP practice, my pharmacy in Rhydyfelin and the Department of Health, went a long way to establish the acceptance of the “smart card” with patients, GPs and pharmacists.

The software available at that time was nowhere near capable of retaining sufficient information and making it readable with sufficient speed and accuracy but the advances made in the past 20 years mean that it is no longer the problem.

The advantages remain the same as of 20 years ago, namely, that the information could be shared readily and immediately by both primary and secondary care without the need for follow-up letters. Within primary care, only being able to access GP information informally has always disadvantaged pharmacists, when limited shared information is, on some occasions, vital.

Other agencies could obtain information necessary to make valid assessments of patients at times of need, eg, does the unconscious patient suffer from epilepsy or is he under the influence of alcohol?

It is the right time for all of us, and especially the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, its new boards and other pharmacy representative bodies, to have a say in the ongoing debate and which could have a lasting consequence upon future health care and at least get the above factors to be considered.

Alan Crabbe
Cardiff

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (Adverse drug events)
Next Topic (Methadone)

Back to Top


©The Pharmaceutical Journal