determine the duration of data retention subsequent to this, in line with the principles of the Data Protection Act. Q14: Where will the audit report be published and who will have access to these? A14: The audit reports will be available on , and data.gov.uk websites. All audit reports will be publically accessible. Our first report will be based on historic data and will provide us with a mechanism for refinement of the methodology. Information included in this initial report will be limited as the audit will be in a developmental phase. For the first prospective data collection period covering surgery undertaken from September 2015 to August 2016, and for each subsequent audit cycle, full reporting will come into effect. This will include case complexity adjusted outcomes for surgical complications and visual acuity loss from cataract surgery for named consultant and independent surgeons, and for named surgical centres. Q15: How will the community optometrists enter the follow up data for a cataract patient? At centres using the electronic optometric data return tool patients will be issued with A15: a letter that contains a unique PIN code. The PIN code will be used to submit the data using a specially designed which will automatically transfer the information into the patient’s Medisoft record back in the hospital. No patient-identifiable data will be visible or stored in the web portal: only the unique PIN code will be visible. Q16: Does the NOD database hold patient identifiable data? A16: The NOD database does not hold any patient identifiable data but does have a unique ID for each patient in order that data extracted from multiple visits can be appropriately matched to the correct patient record. The data are therefore pseudonymised. The unique pseudonymous identifier will be automatically assigned by each Hospital’s EMR software and therefore only the patient’s hospital together with its EMR software provider will be able to identify the patient. This degree of anonymization is standard in other national databases and the approach will be extended to non-EMR sourced data. It is possible that the audit will seek to extract patient identifiable data in the future to facilitate linkage at patient record level with other clinical datasets in order to enhance the scope and impact of the audit. If so a legal basis for this data flow would first be established and the participating centres including their Caldicott Guardians would be informed. Q17: Does the have a section 251 exemption?
determine the duration of data retention subsequent to this, in line with the principles of the Data Protection Act. Q14: Where will the audit report be published and who will have access to these? A14: The audit reports will be available on , and data.gov.uk websites. All audit reports will be publically accessible. Our first report will be based on historic data and will provide us with a mechanism for refinement of the methodology. Information included in this initial report will be limited as the audit will be in a developmental phase. For the first prospective data collection period covering surgery undertaken from September 2015 to August 2016, and for each subsequent audit cycle, full reporting will come into effect. This will include case complexity adjusted outcomes for surgical complications and visual acuity loss from cataract surgery for named consultant and independent surgeons, and for named surgical centres. Q15: How will the community optometrists enter the follow up data for a cataract patient? A15: At centres using the electronic optometric data return tool patients will be issued with a letter that contains a unique PIN code. The PIN code will be used to submit the data using a specially designed which will automatically transfer the information into the patient’s Medisoft record back in the hospital. No patient-identifiable data will be visible or stored in the web portal: only the unique PIN code will be visible. Q16: Does the NOD database hold patient identifiable data? A16: The NOD database does not hold any patient identifiable data but does have a unique ID for each patient in order that data extracted from multiple visits can be appropriately matched to the correct patient record. The data are therefore pseudonymised. The unique pseudonymous identifier will be automatically assigned by each Hospital’s EMR software and therefore only the patient’s hospital together with its EMR software provider will be able to identify the patient. This degree of anonymization is standard in other national databases and the approach will be extended to non-EMR sourced data. It is possible that the audit will seek to extract patient identifiable data in the future to facilitate linkage at patient record level with other clinical datasets in order to enhance the scope and impact of the audit. If so a legal basis for this data flow would first be established and the participating centres including their Caldicott Guardians would be informed. Q17: Does the have a section 251 exemption?
NOD%20Audit%20FAQs%202017.docx