3 ms·

Now living in Sweden which has what seem like very sophisticated e-health systems by comparison (at least on the user-facing side), I wonder why the UK couldn't

Now living in Sweden which has what seem like very sophisticated e-health systems by comparison (at least on the user-facing side), I wonder why the UK couldn't have purchased and adapted an existing system that worked elsewhere.

noir_lord 7y ago
NIH combined with the optics of paying 'foreign' developers. Which is silly given who actually owns large parts of British infrastructure but... We have a confluence of shitty corrupt middle managers masquerading as politicians and a terrible press. I honestly have come to the conclusion that the UK is pretty fucked in the mid to long term.
cs02rm0 7y ago
You've reminded me of someone I know who also worked for an NHS body related to innovation/improvement who went to Amsterdam I think for an international healthcare conference. I said it must have been interesting, lots to learn about. She replied that the NHS was the best in the world and there was nothing to learn about from anyone else in any respect. Sadly, although I remain convinced many people must be slogging against the system, I suspect she isn't alone in that view.
DanBC 7y ago
It's not "the NHS". It's a bunch of GPs, hospital trusts, mental health trusts, community care trusts, and they're all independent competing non-profit businesses. The current Secretary of State at the Department of Health and Social Care is pushing open standards and interoperability, but has an idealogical attachment to private companies providing software after competitive tender.
benmaraschino 7y ago
Denmark's healthcare system tried to implement Epic nationally, and if this article is anything to go by, it didn't go so well: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/06/epic-denmark-health-1510223 https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/06/epic-denmark-healt... Essentially, different healthcare systems have different needs which are reflected in how their electronic health record systems are architected. For example, EHRs in the US are optimized for billing, and if you're moving an US-centric EHR, like Epic, to a country like Denmark with universal healthcare, all that functionality becomes superfluous. Not to mention the language differences, as well, which are touched upon in the article. It's possible that similar concerns played into the NHS's decision to build their own system. Some NHS trusts are moving forward with their own Epic implementations, however. For example: https://www.digitalhealth.net/2018/06/royal-devon-exeter-nhs-foundation-trust-gets-epic/ https://www.digitalhealth.net/2018/06/royal-devon-exeter-nhs...

noir_lord 7y ago

NIH combined with the optics of paying 'foreign' developers. Which is silly given who actually owns large parts of British infrastructure but... We have a confluence of shitty corrupt middle managers masquerading as politicians and a terrible press. I honestly have come to the conclusion that the UK is pretty fucked in the mid to long term.

cs02rm0 7y ago

You've reminded me of someone I know who also worked for an NHS body related to innovation/improvement who went to Amsterdam I think for an international healthcare conference. I said it must have been interesting, lots to learn about. She replied that the NHS was the best in the world and there was nothing to learn about from anyone else in any respect. Sadly, although I remain convinced many people must be slogging against the system, I suspect she isn't alone in that view.

DanBC 7y ago

It's not "the NHS". It's a bunch of GPs, hospital trusts, mental health trusts, community care trusts, and they're all independent competing non-profit businesses. The current Secretary of State at the Department of Health and Social Care is pushing open standards and interoperability, but has an idealogical attachment to private companies providing software after competitive tender.

benmaraschino 7y ago

Denmark's healthcare system tried to implement Epic nationally, and if this article is anything to go by, it didn't go so well: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/06/epic-denmark-health-1510223 https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/06/epic-denmark-healt... Essentially, different healthcare systems have different needs which are reflected in how their electronic health record systems are architected. For example, EHRs in the US are optimized for billing, and if you're moving an US-centric EHR, like Epic, to a country like Denmark with universal healthcare, all that functionality becomes superfluous. Not to mention the language differences, as well, which are touched upon in the article. It's possible that similar concerns played into the NHS's decision to build their own system. Some NHS trusts are moving forward with their own Epic implementations, however. For example: https://www.digitalhealth.net/2018/06/royal-devon-exeter-nhs-foundation-trust-gets-epic/ https://www.digitalhealth.net/2018/06/royal-devon-exeter-nhs...