Literature DB >> 12869331

The Patient Information Advisory Group and the use of patient-identifiable data.

Joan Higgins1.   

Abstract

Patient confidentiality has been a matter of concern in the English National Health Service (NHS) for many years. A number of recent events have triggered the demand for a more concerted programme of change to eliminate the use of patient-identifiable data and to devise more acceptable alternatives. The Caldicott Committee, in 1997, set out the case for change and legislation in 1998 (the Data Protection Act and Human Rights Act) and emphasised the need for urgent action. A number of public inquiries into failures of care in the NHS (at Bristol Royal Infirmary and Alder Hey Hospital) pointed to the failure to seek consent as a major issue for the NHS. Whilst accepting the need for change, the Government, in drafting the Health and Social Care Act 2001, allowed for the fact that some organisations and individuals would need time to move towards anonymisation of data (reversible or irreversible) or to obtain patient consent. Under Section 60 of the Act it established the Patient Information Advisory Group (PIAG). PIAG advises government ministers on circumstances in which the continued use of patient-identifiable data should be permitted, as a temporary measure. PIAG faces a number of challenges as it develops its programme of work: how to maintain the pace of change towards anonymisation, how to ensure compliance with the law, how or whether to share information across organisational boundaries in the interests of citizens, how consent should be obtained and how to achieve 'joined up' working across those organisations that are charged with promoting confidentiality and privacy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12869331     DOI: 10.1258/135581903766468819

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy        ISSN: 1355-8196


  6 in total

1.  Cross sectional survey of multicentre clinical databases in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  Nick Black; Marian Barker; Mary Payne
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-06-19

2.  Legal aspects of records based medical research.

Authors:  S E Parkes
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.791

3.  Extracting information from hospital records: what patients think about consent.

Authors:  Bruce Campbell; Helen Thomson; Jessica Slater; Colin Coward; Katrina Wyatt; Kieran Sweeney
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2007-12

4.  National survey of British public's views on use of identifiable medical data by the National Cancer Registry.

Authors:  Geraldine Barrett; Jackie A Cassell; Janet L Peacock; Michel P Coleman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-04-28

5.  Saudi views on consenting for research on medical records and leftover tissue samples.

Authors:  Mohammad M Al-Qadire; Muhammad M Hammami; Hunida M Abdulhameed; Eman A Al Gaai
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2010-10-18       Impact factor: 2.652

6.  Low risk research using routinely collected identifiable health information without informed consent: encounters with the Patient Information Advisory Group.

Authors:  C Metcalfe; R M Martin; S Noble; J A Lane; F C Hamdy; D E Neal; J L Donovan
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 2.903

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.