The study found that there is a negative inner-city influence on the uptake of computerisation. Some of the results reported are not surprising, for example, cost and practice size emerged as the two main factors influencing the decision to computerise. The practices generally criticised the level of training provided by the suppliers, with only one of the main suppliers being rated as good in quality, availability and value for money. The recommendations from this report are also not surprising, but are no less valuable for that. The report identified the vital role that FHSAs play in supporting computerisation in general practice, but stresses that they must consider how they are to develop this role.
Standardisation is the key to success.
There needs to be agreement on data collection protocols between FHSAs so that comparisons can easily be made across the country on any topic. The report makes a number of recommendations about the required level for future reimbursement and for the need to make better use of systems already in place, through continuous, funded training and support. On balance this is an interesting reference work for anybody involved in general practice computing, but the study has not revealed any startling new facts.