By Andy McCue, 21 August 2006 16:30
NEWS
There is "no believable plan" for the development of the key clinical records software at the heart of the NHS' £6.2bn IT programme, according to a leaked review of the plans.
The review of troubled healthcare software company iSoft's development roadmap for the Lorenzo clinical records software was compiled by NHS IT lead contractors Accenture and CSC.
iSoft is currently developing an interim version of the product for use by GPs - due to be ready in October this year - and claims it will have a full version of the Lorenzo software ready for use in NHS trusts by the second quarter of 2008.
But the review, seen by silicon.com, said this timetable is "highly optimistic" and raises concerns about whether the iSoft product will even be fit for purpose when it is ready.
The document said there is "no well-defined scope and therefore no believable plan for releases beyond Lorenzo GP", and that any scope and planning is "entirely speculative".
One of the major concerns raised by Accenture and CSC in the report is that iSoft is building a generic solution that will require time-consuming and costly customisation to meet the needs of the Connecting for Health (CfH) NHS IT programme.
Want more on NHS IT?
Read silicon.com's feature The nine projects at the heart of NHS IT for the lowdown on the colossal £6.2bn IT upgrade.
The report said: "There is a significant risk that an evaluation of the 'gap' between the needs of CfH and the capability of the generic solution will require significant rework of product and platform layers. This will likely lead to schedule slippage."
The report adds that iSoft's release dates are also only for delivery of the software to the lead NHS IT contractors, with typical estimates of an additional six to nine months before it is rolled out in hospitals.
Concerns are also expressed in the report about the ability of the Lorenzo software to scale to the required level.
The report said: "Recent benchmarks of the application are not encouraging with average response times of four seconds (and this with key operability features of the architecture disabled). CfH response time requirements are sub-second."
iSoft shares fell on Monday morning in response to the leaked report and the company did not respond to a request for comment.
silicon.com Public Sector
Get the latest public sector news straight to your inbox. Sign up for the PS newsletter today!
A CfH spokesman said: "NHS CfH does not comment on leaked reports. However, we look to our prime contractors to manage the sub-contractors to ensure that systems are delivered to our specification, are fit for purpose and have no clinical risk. All systems are rigorously tested before deployment into the NHS to ensure there is no clinical risk for patients."
Comments
There are 4 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
As the 'leaked' report has been prepared by two eminent IT suppliers to the UK Government, I wonder how much is true and how much is related to positioning these two eminent suppliers to provide their own 'solution'.
2. anonymous
Accenture & CSC stupidly signed up to a contract with CfH which has some of the worst penlties ever seen...then they allowed CfH to force iSOFT onto them...and then there BT delivering the bankbone...BT couldn't deliver a milk bottle on time...meanwhile GPs don't want it, tax payers are funding it and patients are forgotten becuase all the fat cats who are creaming it in this fiasco are covered by Private Health plans....This programme is an unmitigated disaster on a momumental scale....
3. Richard
The myth about NHS records:
Last week, I needed antibiotics. My GP keeps all medical records on a computer system.
However, rather than querying the computer, the GP asked me about any allergies to antibiotics.
I later had an adverse reaction.
Why do politicians and NHS managers place such importance and trust in NHS records?
Like the worst days of those useless reports produced by old IT departments: "9 times out of 10, they're irrelevant; the tenth time they're wrong!"
Just how will making these inaccurate records more widely available, at vast expense, actually improve patient care?
4. anonymous
The whole history of ISoft is of a software company with ambitions (& executives) way too big for its capabilities.
Even before NPfIT, it could not deliver bug-free software that met their clients' requirements. I evaluated them for EPRs then, and they came a poor 8th out of 10.
Running life-critical systems for an NHS purely on Microsoft technologies - a risk I wouldn't be prepared to take...
As soon as we saw Accenture and CSC partnering with them, the LSPs were doomed, as was LSPs with IDX - who only had one NHS trust with their software prior to LSPs.
Both software houses were desparate to make a name and committed to anything regardless of consequences to patients and NHS.
ISoft as a national system? Don't make me laugh....!