Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
I have become increasingly concerned about the safe storage of the
general practice record as I am the chief practice summariser of medical
data at my practice. Notes arrive at the practice with Lloyd George paper
and letters and computer paper downloads in an increasing jumble.The
volume of paper in recent records(this mirrors the experience of office
workers who have seen paper increases of 43% or more)will cause storage
difficulties unless scanning occurs!Some paper computer downloads are
already fading away! Of course such downloads are not really legally
binding as there is no audit trail to confirm their veracity. Medical
summaries are prepared by untrained coders(compare the hospital coding
department training)and these need to be rewritten. Perhaps this will
explain why two hard discs sit under lock and key in the practice managers
office! These are the old defunct general practice computer systems' hard
drive confirming the audit trail- the computers will need to be rebuilt if
the necessary hardware and software still exists- they are supposedly the
safe storage of my patients' computer record- some think this is a step
too far but I wonder what other readers think!
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests:
No competing interests
11 January 2004
Nigel J Masters
general practitoner
highfield surgery ,highfield way, Hazlemere High Wycombe HP15 7uw
Saving primary care records
I have become increasingly concerned about the safe storage of the
general practice record as I am the chief practice summariser of medical
data at my practice. Notes arrive at the practice with Lloyd George paper
and letters and computer paper downloads in an increasing jumble.The
volume of paper in recent records(this mirrors the experience of office
workers who have seen paper increases of 43% or more)will cause storage
difficulties unless scanning occurs!Some paper computer downloads are
already fading away! Of course such downloads are not really legally
binding as there is no audit trail to confirm their veracity. Medical
summaries are prepared by untrained coders(compare the hospital coding
department training)and these need to be rewritten. Perhaps this will
explain why two hard discs sit under lock and key in the practice managers
office! These are the old defunct general practice computer systems' hard
drive confirming the audit trail- the computers will need to be rebuilt if
the necessary hardware and software still exists- they are supposedly the
safe storage of my patients' computer record- some think this is a step
too far but I wonder what other readers think!
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests