Recurring concern
Failure to reliably transfer medical records between healthcare organisations
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correctionFirst reported 28 Nov 2013•Latest report 20 Oct 2025
What this concern includes
Includes failures in the dedicated transfer of existing medical records between healthcare organisations, including delayed, incomplete, untraceable or systemically unsupported transfer between GP practices, hospitals, mental-health services or other healthcare organisations where the records are needed for safe care.
Not included
- Excludes generic inter-agency information-sharing failures where the asserted object is not medical records or an equivalent clinical record transfer.
- Excludes failures to create, complete or accurately maintain records when transfer or inter-organisational availability is not the unsafe condition.
- Excludes failures limited to reviewing or acting on records after they have been reliably transferred and made available.
- Excludes transfer of non-clinical records, administrative documents or information between organisations without a healthcare medical-record context.
- Excludes communication of isolated clinical advice or results where the dedicated medical-record transfer process is not deficient.
- Reports
- 29
- Individual concerns
- 30
- Date range
- 2013–2025
- Stated actions
- 47
Distinct published reports
A report can raise multiple concerns
First to latest report issue date
Described in published responses
Reports over time
Reports 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.
Concerns and responses across reports
Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to provide Shropdoc personnel with access to referring patients’ GP records
This report raised 7 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Write to practices encouraging discussion of enhanced Summary Care Records with patients who have chronic illness.
Stated by SHROPSHIRE & TELFORD LOCAL MEDICAL COMMITTEE
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to routinely share clinical assessment records with receiving community mental health services outside the county
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to share and access mental health records effectively between organisations
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of compatible digital record-keeping and medical note systems enabling information sharing between maternity services
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of an out-of-hours process for obtaining and transferring iCope notes to Rio
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
-
Action
Maintain a protocol for checking new referrals against IAPTUS and recording relevant current or recent ICope contacts on RiO.
Stated by North London NHS Foundation Trust -
Action
Train designated acute-assessment staff across liaison, crisis-resolution and bed-management teams to check IAPTUS records and access clinical notes.
Stated by North London NHS Foundation Trust
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Entering all ICope patient data in both systems is impractical and would provide little benefit because of the service’s referral volume.
Stated by North London NHS Foundation Trust
-
Concerns raised1
Difficulties in transferring medical notes and records
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure of patient-note transfer between paper-based and electronic hospital systems
This report raised 7 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
-
Action
Develop and roll out the Chameleon electronic patient-record system across the Trust in stages.
Stated by Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust -
Action
Implement electronic patient records on Ward 16 so clinicians at both sites can access up-to-date notes without transferring paper records.
Stated by Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Electronic records were accessible at both sites, so no further transfer of paper notes was considered necessary.
Stated by Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to transfer recorded medication allergy information across subsequent records and to GPs
This report raised 4 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
The records did not contain a consistently recorded penicillin allergy; staff were aware of the patient's reported allergies.
Stated by East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to provide the GP surgery with access to transferred patient records
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
Data last updated 7 September 2026