![]() It just demonstrates how careful you have to be at every stage in the system." "When that information was fed into the test's calculations, the resulting risk level was wrong. When the computer got to 2000 it just didn't calculate the mother's age correctly. ![]() Professor Davies said yesterday: "It was very specifically related to the millennium. The blunder affected women from South Yorkshire and the east Midlands, an area served by nine hospitals which sent samples to the Northern general. It said: "In part, the fact that the service had run successfully for 10 years led to a degree of overconfidence in the processes used and the software which contributed to the warning signs being overlooked and accommodated as acceptable errors." The report, commissioned by Lindsey Davies, regional director of public health, also found that checks and monitoring of the Northern general's PathLAN computer system had become complacent. The team's 112-page report found that a dating mistake continued until tests carried out on May 24 that year, when it was finally spotted. The investigation followed the belated discovery of the computer error at the Northern general hospital in Sheffield, where tests on samples from the women started on January 4 last year, less than a week after the NHS's intensive anti-millennium bug preparations for 2000 were completed. The report called for extra training for staff in more sophisticated monitoring of Down's syndrome risks. ![]() The inquiry also recommended that the computer model which failed should be re-examined by the NHS and replaced if it was considered too simple. Four Down's syndrome babies were also born to mothers who had been told their tests put them in the low-risk group. ![]() Investigators in Sheffield admitted two terminations were carried out as a direct result of the mistaken test reports. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |