An article published recently in Pulse by Michael Soljak and I examined the use of patient reported outcome measures. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) estimate the effectiveness of healthcare delivered to patients as perceived by the patients themselves. The recent Government White Paper, ‘Equity and excellence: Liberating the NHS',2 envisages an increase in the scope and coverage of PROMs in future, starting from April 2011. For providers, PROMs will provide important data for quality improvement, in the form of comparative, casemix-adjusted pre- to post-operative changes in scores. They will also have a role in commissioning. For example, PROMs might be used to identify procedures with little benefit, or subgroups of patients who do not benefit greatly from surgery. This could allow more effective targeting of resources to improve health gain.
As part of a session on primary care data in the Health Informatics module on the Imperial Master of Public Health Programme, I asked students to work in two groups to present arguments for and against the NHS Care.Data programme. Care.Data is an NHS programme that will extract data from the medical records held by general practitioners (GPs) in England. The Care.Data programme takes advantage of the very high level of use of electronic medical records by GPs in England. After extraction, data will be uploaded to the NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC). The data will then be used for functions such as health care planning, monitoring disease patterns and research. The programme has been controversial with proponents arguing that the programme will bring many benefits for the NHS and the population of England; and opponents arguing it is a major breach of privacy. You can view the two presentations to help inform you further about these arguments: Arguments for th
Comments