Unreliable receipt and routing of clinical correspondence by GP practices
First to latest report 1 May 2014 — 23 Sep 2025
Reports that mention this concern
4
Times this concern has been raised
4
Stated actions linked to this concern
7
What this concern includes
Includes GP-practice arrangements for receiving, routing, redirecting, logging and confirming receipt of clinically important correspondence, including post between co-located practices and faxed correspondence from clinicians or services.
What is not included
Excludes failures to review, interpret or act on correspondence after it has been reliably received; those belong to a downstream correspondence-review concern.
Excludes outgoing clinical correspondence from healthcare services to GPs where the deficient process is preparation or dispatch rather than GP-practice receipt or routing.
Excludes generic postal, fax, IT or administrative failures without a direct clinical-correspondence safety consequence.
Excludes correspondence unrelated to patient care or clinical follow-up.
Trends
Reports over time
Reports mentioning this concern, over time
Reports about this concern issued each year.
* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.
Most frequent recipients
Most frequent recipients
Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.
NHS England2
Barts Health NHS Trust1
Bexley Medical Group1
Mundesley Medical Centre1
NHS Norfolk and Suffolk Integrated Care Board1
NHS North Norfolk Clinical Commissioning Group1
NHS Tower Hamlets Clinical Commissioning Group1
Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust1
Tredegar Practice1
White Horse Medical Practice1
Healthcare site4
Clinical commissioning group2
Executive non-departmental public body2
NHS trust2
Integrated care board1
Reports and published responses 4 reports
See individual reports that have raised this concern, and the actions taken in response
Wiltshire and Swindon
Concerns raised1
Failure of nhs.net email to reliably deliver important information to GP practices
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Linked responses
NHS England
Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust
Stated actions An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.4
Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust
Use DocMan instead of email for DWF Hub referral-outcome communication with GPs, except when the referrer explicitly requests email.
Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust
Evaluate the DWF Hub’s DocMan process and use Trust governance processes to decide whether to adopt it across the other Hub teams.
Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust
Review AMHT communication practice, identify available changes and assess which options could strengthen controls against GPs missing important communications.
NHS England
Undertake Clinical Safety Cases, Hazard Logs and Data Protection Impact Assessments before national NHSmail deployment.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.3
Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust
The Trust will not change AMHT communication practices until it understands available options, utility and potential consequences.
Unable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
NHS England
The forensic search found that the mental health email was received by the GP practice and copied into the patient's clinical record.
Disputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
NHS England
NHSmail is considered reliable and resilient, with monitoring, recovery mechanisms, support arrangements and established clinical safety controls.
Existing arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Inner South London
Concerns raised1
Ineffective redirection of post between co-located GP practices
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
No linked response statements
No respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
Inner North London
Concerns raised1
Lack of a system at the GP practice to ensure successful receipt of important correspondence
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
No linked response statements
No respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
Norfolk
Concerns raised1
Failure of GP practice guidelines to require referral of correspondence concerning a patient’s suicide risk or self-harming behaviour to a doctor or GP
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Linked response
Mundesley Medical Centre
Stated actions An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.3
Mundesley Medical Centre
Develop clear communication channels with NCH&C staff to alert the practice and summarise relevant concerns or actions.
Mundesley Medical Centre
Inform a GP when outside agencies make direct mental-health referrals, including relevant substance-misuse, safeguarding or domestic-violence concerns.
Mundesley Medical Centre
Show correspondence about vulnerable people at risk of suicide or deliberate self-harm to a GP.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
Mundesley Medical Centre
The neuropsychological report was not passed to a GP because it recorded historical self-harm and stated there was no current suicidal intent.
Disputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Mundesley Medical Centre
The referral letter was filed because it indicated no action for the practice and did not identify current suicide risk requiring GP review.
No action considered necessaryThe respondent said that no further action was needed.
Actions and positions describe what organisations say in published responses. Implementation is not independently verified.
Actions and positions describe what organisations say in published responses. Implementation is not independently verified.