Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I was due to have a routine annual blood test and popped in this morning to pick up a referral. Unfortunately due to the recent cyber attack I was told there will be no blood tests at all at Tessa Jowell for the next month. They weren't even able to access my referral so that i could take it somewhere else. They said it might reopen sooner and I should check in every week but they thought at least a month. This has apparently not just affected Tessa Jowell but everywhere using the same system as Kings NHS. 

Bit more info here, though it was not exactly my experience. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd115yw8pd3o

BBC story says they can still deal with serious cases but that wasn't the impression I got.

Has anyone else had this problem and navigated an alternative?

Edited by sandyman
clarification of title
  • sandyman changed the title to No Blood Tests At Tessa Jowell/Kings College Hospital Or Anywhere Near Here For At Least A Month

This is from the Swiftqueue booking system.

IMPORTANT NOTICE - All routine phlebotomy services have now been paused until further notice at King’s College Hospital and the Tessa Jowell Healthcare Centre. If your clinician tells you your blood test is clinically urgent, please attend the phlebotomy clinic at King’s College Hospital. If you have a GP referral, your GP must indicate that your test is ‘Urgent’ on the form, otherwise we are unable to see you. You do not need to book an appointment in advance using Swiftqueue, however please turn up between the hours of 08.00 and 17:00 at King’s College Hospital where you can make a same day appointment within the clinic. We are incredibly sorry for any upset or inconvenience this has caused you. Thank you for your patience and understanding.

 

Yes I had a blood test booked at Tessa Jowell for the 1st day of this crisis, 4 June & received a text cancelling the night before. GP surgery don’t know when it will be sorted but we’re saying check back beginning of July. 
A BBC tv report last week showed operations being cancelled at Kings & urgent cases being transferred to St George’s. Blood tests are being done for patients at Kings but they are taking much longer as they cannot use the software to process & everything has to be double checked manually.

As my tests are not urgent I’ll just wait until they are up & running again.

If you have urgent tests they call you and get you to come into Kings - you don't need to book, its just walk in (and was a lot quieter than usual when I went in last week). Tessa Jowell are taking bookings from 2 July on Swiftqueue, when I checked a little while ago...

I had a blood test booked for monday 17th..I booked it on the 5th June and that was first date available due to the cyber attack.

I got a confermation text took the morning off work turned up the health centre to be told no blood tests unless deemed urgent by the GP and they had no idea when the system would be working again..I was advised to go back to my GP surgery since he referred me..I spoke to the receptionist and she kindly messaged my GP who reading my notes and the reason for the refferal deemed the test urgent and they did it that morning at my GP surgery.

I'm In Lewisham but my nearest hospital is actually Kings.

Slight deviation here, but as Synnovis could be found in breech of its data protection duties and lost patient private data, will there be consequences for them and possibility of loosing the contract  🤔 

Has anyone who has had their data breached been contacted? 

I don't think a cyber attack by criminals actually counts as being 'in breach of its data protection duties'. It would have to be demonstrated that Synnovis was willfully careless. Hospitals have also been  attacked similarly. If your house was burgled and your address book stolen would you anticipate being charged under data protection legislation?

  • Agree 2
3 hours ago, alice said:

There’s a shortage of blood. Southwark has a Twitter post asking for people to come into these dropping centres to give blood. Someone with better IT skills than me may be able to provide the link. 

Isn't that a completely separate issue?

Surely blood tests are to aid in diagnosis or to monitor an already known illness, whereas blood is needed for transfusions?

They are calling for donors with O type blood to come forward and donate:

"For surgeries and procedures requiring blood to take place, hospitals need to use O type blood as this is safe to use for all patients.

"That means more units of these types of blood than usual will be required over the coming weeks to support the wider efforts of frontline staff to keep services running safely for local patients."

Looks like I'm going to be losing very nearly an armful ...

(Boomer joke from 1961)

https://www.healthwatchsouthwark.org/news/2024-06-11/o-positive-and-o-negative-donors-asked-urgently-book-appointment-give-blood

  • Thanks 1
26 minutes ago, Sue said:

Surely blood tests are to aid in diagnosis or to monitor an already known illness, whereas blood is needed for transfusions?

Blood tests are also required to determine blood-type for cross-matching for transfusions - whilst that facility is down/ much reduced having large(r)  supplies of Type O is a necessary precaution, as this can be used across multiple blood types. So, having more Type O means that fewer cross-matching tests need to be done.

  • Thanks 1
5 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

I don't think a cyber attack by criminals actually counts as being 'in breach of its data protection duties'. It would have to be demonstrated that Synnovis was willfully careless. Hospitals have also been  attacked similarly. If your house was burgled and your address book stolen would you anticipate being charged under data protection legislation?

Have to disagree, I believe they have a responsibility under GDPR to hold safely all data they have on patients, they've clearly failed as the data has been breached. 

  • Thanks 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • "They sold everyone, directly or indirectly, on the notion that Covid, the energy crisis and the war in Ukraine had nothing to do with the sorry state of the UK and that it was 14 years of Tory rule and Truss' nightmare budget that was the source of all the country's woes. " This simply isn't true. Global issues all play their own parts (as they do with other countries) but the UK govt had  been especially abject for years. Improvements could not be made with them in power. That's not to say everything is all roses when they go To claim parties shouldn't try and sell themselves in an election is absurd - but if labour did overpromise or dig into specifics (which they partly couldn't because they didn't have their hands on the books) then we live in a country where a population and media is happy to punch on them and relect the shabby last govt I mean if any argument I made was supported by some posters I would rethink it but thats just me
    • They just gave woolly and opaque policies on the basis of "we will not increase tax for working people" and then could not clearly define what a working person is. They sold everyone, directly or indirectly, on the notion that Covid, the energy crisis and the war in Ukraine had nothing to do with the sorry state of the UK and that it was 14 years of Tory rule and Truss' nightmare budget that was the source of all the country's woes. the moment they got in they lent in to the notion that change will be slow due to global challenges. The electorate are impatient and Labour were always going to have a huge job to keep people onside and bought in to the (long) journey the country is on to any sort of recovery. Their first 100 days should have been about solidifying the electorate's support for the journey but instead they have lurched from one own-goal to another and I think significantly distanced themselves from the electorate as they have behaved just like the Tories in many aspects of leadership (access to donors, clothing gate). Throw in spin on the £22bn gap (of which around £9bn was based on their own decisions), Winter Fuel payments ending and the attack on farmers (the very definition of working people) and it has been an utter disaster. They have a massive perceptual problem and seem incapable of delivering crisp messages that the people can get behind. Listening to members of the government trying to explain the intricacies and details of much of the aforementioned challenges is utterly painful to watch and people shut off after a couple of sentences. In opposition you can get away with soundbites and when you get scrutinised you can bridge to "14 years of hurt" and "we're not them" and people will buy it. When you're in the hot seat those things sounds hollow and suggest you don't have the answers and people will turn on you very quickly. It is in everyone's interests that they get it right because with a Tory party chasing the far-right vote because of Reform and Reform picking up disillusioned main political party voters then the alternative is really scary. Of course, we also have the threat from within the Labour party itself as if things don't go well for Starmer & co we could find Labour turning on itself.    
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...