Smart watches on the NHS for some says Streeting.

I’m not sure about this. A big NHS IT project…..What could possibly go wrong? Someone needs to collate the data from these ‘free’ watches. I know I sound cynical. Maybe it’s a learned response.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

I’m not sure about this. A big NHS IT project…..What could possibly go wrong? Someone needs to collate the data from these ‘free’ watches. I know I sound cynical. Maybe it’s a learned response.

Maybe it’s because you’ve not needed to use one? The results are already being fed through to the teams of the patients who use smart devices of many kinds. The doctors and nurses use the results to help with treatment plans on an individual basis - this isn’t a new concept to the NHS.

I know.
Remember it’s your name and address, age and other identifiers that are of value. Kings College Hospital lost a huge amount of patients personal data when its laboratories contractor was hacked this year.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

I know.
Remember it’s your name and address, age and other identifiers that are of value. Kings College Hospital lost a huge amount of patients personal data when its laboratories contractor was hacked this year.

So you would say that investment should not be made in case there’s a data breach of somebody’s smartwatch data, even though that persons life is being prolonged or saved by sending the hospital team their reading, and there are safeguards in place?

I’m saying the NHS doesn’t have a good track record with collating and sharing data with the myriad wonky systems it employs. Various hospital Trusts are unable to share data between departments. I’m not sure this project will come close to delivering what Streeting hopes. Ultimately it’s to save the NHS money over the next ten years apparently.

I just think it’s tinkering around the edges. More robust tackling of the NHS model itself could do wonders.

Do other countries who run a better health service than we do offer smart watches to their citizens?

Smart watches are widely used, as this research paper collating evidence from various countries shows.
bmcmedinformdecismak.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12911-023-02350-w
See the conclusion.
Whether they provide smart watches to patients I don’t know, but they certainly use them within their hospitals and healthcare settings. Not providing them for people who can’t afford to buy them would result in a two tier NHS.

Finland.

Okay you’ve sold me.
Who’s supplying the watches? China I expect.

Finland has the same number of residents as Manchester.
Maybe Streeting plans to roll it out slowly, using a pilot study first.

Here’s an article from the Lancet for nerds who like the detail and to know where the technology might go next - maybe that’s just me, I find stuff like this really interesting, it’s developing all the time.
www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7500(23)00087-0/fulltext

I read your Lancet link Casdon. Thank you.

And BOOM❗️

“The ubiquity of wearable devices risks that they will be used in clinical decision making, irrespective of validation. Despite a wide range of studies, they have not yet been shown to improve defined medical outcomes “. (my underlining)

So I ask, what will be the cost to the NHS, issuing these watches free of charge, collating the data etc and to ‘what end’ if there are, as yet, no tangible benefits.

I remind you:
As Blair said “we have to be SEEN to be doing something”.

Could this (expense) be Labour’s PPE cock up?

I read lots of reports and reviews about these gadgets and they all said they were not very accurate.

Casdon thank you for posting the Lancet link, it's really interesting and it's clearly the future especially for those of us with heart problems .

And the NHS procurement procedure dictates they won’t be buying top end models.

Perhaps I didn’t make it very clear. My quote was taken from said Lancet article.

Oh FriedGreenTomatoes2 do you not realise that taking one sentence out of a list entitled‘Challenges’ risks you misunderstanding the context of the whole article?
If you skim read, the Conclusion is the best way of getting the article summary.

‘ Conclusion
Wearable technology has the potential to elevate the routine clinical consultation from a subjective discussion based on patient recollection to a standardised series of objective parameters of both health and quality of life gathered over months or years. Wearable devices have shown some potential application in many cardiovascular diseases, either through disease screening or monitoring; however, the evidence base and the integration of wearable data into clinical cardiology is still in its infancy. Such data could soon help personalise and improve the management of cardiovascular diseases on multiple levels, ultimately resulting in better outcomes on both an individual and a population-wide scale.’

Note the word ‘soon’. This article was published last year, and this is a rapidly growing field, the technology is already being used for some diseases as demonstrated by people who have contributed to this thread, so scoping the potential for patients using smart technology in the areas of medicine where it can help is the right thing to do now.

I ave been away on holiday so I do not know much about this scheme,but I assume that if someone was given a smart watch to monitor their health and help them keep well, then the issuing authority would have the mens to check that they still have the device on each visit to their GP or other medical check and would also have on record whether the relevant data was being collected and acted apon and it it wan't then they could require the person with the smart watch to either return it in good order, and if they claiit is lost stolen or strayed they could be changed the full amount it cost to be paid upfront of by the means of small monthly payments, if necessary fro teir benefits.

As they used to say, don't look for problems, look for solutions!.

Goodness me, its almost as if some want this to fail just to score a political point!

Successful trials were done under the Tories like this one with Parkinsons patients 2022

www.england.nhs.uk/2022/04/parkinsons-patients-benefit-from-revolutionary-watch-on-the-nhs-to-manage-care-at-home/

There were others as well under the Tories. And the testimony of people here.

Clearly there has to be careful consultation and if necessary more trials including accepting that some patients who might benefit cant manage the process.

Meanwhile, more on Finland - if only...

toolbox.finland.fi/themes/functionality-and-wellbeing/finland-as-a-global-pioneer-of-smart-health/

I appreciate that Casdon and I did read to the end and took in the ‘Conclusions’ part.

However the ‘challenges’ aspect still concerns me.

Let’s hope that ‘soon’ justifies the cost and gives tangible benefits. Streeting must think so. 🤞

FriedGreenTomatoes2

I appreciate that Casdon and I did read to the end and took in the ‘Conclusions’ part.

However the ‘challenges’ aspect still concerns me.

Let’s hope that ‘soon’ justifies the cost and gives tangible benefits. Streeting must think so. 🤞

The important element for me is that the medical profession think it adds value to treatment, and gives more control and reassurance to patients. The fact that so many different applications are both in routine use and in trial worldwide illustrates that. This isn’t Wes Streeting’s whim, it’s what the NHS has told him is required to improve patient care - as Wyllow said, he didn’t start this.

Fair enough.
The proof of the pudding will be in the eating as they say.

I don’t really know what to say about this. Maybe it would be helpful, and maybe it wouldn’t. I really don’t know. I hope those who think it would help are absolutely sure that it will be helpful before they set it in motion.

What’s the objective? Who are the target group? Is there an age cut off?

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/2RMlKr3cnmB9TswchR9KZRg/how-accurate-are-fitness-monitoring-gadgets-and-step-counters

That is all covered in the Lancet article Lisaangel110, which also gives a lot of additional information. It is worth a read.