When technology fails patients: What the latest NHS records controversy tells us

The NHS has invested heavily in electronic patient record (EPR) systems in recent years, with trusts across the country moving away from paper-based records in the hope of improving efficiency, reducing errors and enhancing patient care.

In principle, the benefits are clear. Clinicians should be able to access patient information more easily, communication between departments should improve and administrative burdens should be reduced.

Indeed, when Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust announced the launch of its new EPR system in November 2025, the trust described the move away from paper records as a “game changing” development, helping to take it “out of the digital dark ages”.

However, recent allegations emerging from the trust serve as a reminder that introducing new technology into healthcare is not without risk.

Speaking to LBC, a whistleblower clinician described serious concerns about the trust’s EPR system, alleging that problems with the system had resulted in missing or unreliable patient information, missed referrals, and delayed diagnoses. In one worrying incident, a cancer patient with Covid died whilst waiting for a haematology referral after the request was not received by the department. Staff at the trust were said to be left “in tears” by the problems they have faced.

The whistleblower went on to tell LBC that when they attempted to raise the alarm with senior management regarding the issues with the EPR system, it was like they “didn’t want to know”.

It should be emphasised that NHS trusts are bound by a statutory duty of candour where issues arise in a patient’s treatment. This includes an obligation to inform the patient (or their family) promptly after a safety incident resulting in death or harm.

A wider issue for the NHS

Issues relating to EPR systems and patient harm are not new.

In November 2025, national safety watchdog The Health Services Safety Investigations Body (HSSIB) published a review concluding that the risk of EPR systems contributing to patient care being missed, delayed or incorrect were “persistent” despite national recommendations seeking to mitigate them.

The HSSIB review also outlined examples where EPR systems had directly contributed to incidents of patient harm, such as where a four-year-old child received multiple incorrect doses of medication as the system has been configured to prescribe adult strength medication, which then contributed to bleeding around her brain.

Further, in September 2024, The Guardian highlighted serious safety concerns after Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust reported more than 900 incidents, including potential patient harm, following the roll-out of its new EPR system.

A BBC investigation in May of the same year reported that over 200,000 medical letters had wrongly gone unsent and that there had been at least 126 instances of serious harm linked to IT issues and three deaths connected to EPR problems in hospital trusts, with a “culture of cover-up in the NHS” contributing to the risk to patient safety.

What NHS trusts can learn from EPR-related safety concerns

While the allegations emerging from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust are yet to be fully investigated, they highlight several important considerations for NHS organisations introducing new EPR systems.

It would be prudent for NHS trusts to take heed of the advice of the HSSIB, who have previously outlined ways in which risks associated with EPR systems can be mitigated.

• Choosing an EPR system capable of meeting the needs of an organisation, including having a clear understanding of what the requirements of the trust are and what the EPR system is capable of doing. Some staff also felt that the decision over which EPR system to implement has been influenced by cost savings, rather than capability.