This portal provides an open platform for user feedback and product change requests. Anyone can add an idea and remain as a Guest, but please consider signing up so that others can see who has created the ideas!
Note: this is a public facing web portal, any text here can be viewed by anyone over the internet, so please consider carefully the content you wish to share and please do not post anything of a sensitive nature.
We need to define a process for making new data available to consuming organisations using the Interweave Portal as it goes live in the YHCR. Much of this process will be determined at a local level by each organisation and will require them to think about 1) any restrictions on certain types of data to certain types of users and 2) if any process change, training etc needs to be put in place in order to support users in effectively embedding the new data in the way they work and make decisions.
The two options discussed today were:
To make new data available automatically to consuming organisations, as long as the required panels were in place. This would require a process being put in place to notify the nominated lead/s in an organisation of new data before it goes live so they can initiate their own internal business go-live process
Add functionality within the Portal that enables consuming organisations to choose what data they wish to 'switch on' and when, with a disclaimer that by enabling the data to flow the organisation has undertaken the required business change activity. For GPs, this would probably be determined at a CCG or ICS level.
This would seem to be a question that needs the input of the IG and clinical safety leads for the YHCR as it will impact all ICSs and is tied into the overall process that needs to be defined around pushing out new data. They will be best placed to advise on any potential risks from an IG and clinical safety perspective and then based on their input we would engage with the organisations involved in pilots.
Hi Tara
Having had several conversations internally, we do not see this as an IG issue but there are some valid Clinical Safety concerns. However, the consensus is that we need to work with option 1, and the current risk mitigation measures in the product and process are sufficient, these include:
portal tenants should engage with the existing 2-week Staging window to assess all new data provision following comms from the central team, i.e. before this data goes live
users will (after some current development in progress) have easy access to see which data is being provided and by whom
panels can be disabled within a tenancy if there is significant concern about new data
individual users can use the right-hand menu to exclude data from certain providers (for a particular session)
Local SOPs and training e.g. users could rely on current ways of working and query directly with the providing organisation
Local organisations should of course determine their own approach to clinical safety as part of their on-going commitment to CS assurance
It’s worth noting that Option 2 would not be without its own risk, especially if a partial patient record is presented. I guess fundamentally, we believe the risks of not providing data outweigh those of providing data