We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
YESTERDAY, THE HSE apologised after a rapid review identified over 4,000 cases where women who’d had smear tests weren’t told of their results through a combination of IT issues and human error.
In 873 of these cases, no letters about test results were issued to the women or their GPs. In the other 3,200 cases the results were issued to GPs but not to the women involved. The HSE stressed yesterday that the women affected in these cases were at “low clinical risk”.
One of the major findings of Professor Brian MacCraith’s review was that there was a “constant theme” of women frustrated by poor service and lack of information.
He said that perhaps the “most significant” impact from the IT problem was that many women waiting for test results received no communication for a period of six months.
Professor MacCraith used the story of one woman – named Sharon – to detail how women who followed up to try to receive the results of their cervical screening were denied information, and how the issue could have been resolved a lot sooner.
Backlog
Sharon was diagnosed with pre-cancerous cells 10 years ago.
She’d had annual screening since then, and had previously received the results within six weeks of the sample being taken.
On 3 December 2018, she had a smear test. She didn’t receive her results within six weeks, and followed up with her GP. Sharon was told the current waiting time was up to 14 weeks “due to issues over the past year”. (You can read more on these well-publicised issues here).
On 26 March 2019 – a full 16 weeks after her smear test – she called the CervicalCheck helpline and was told her results weren’t available. This was escalated to a CervicalCheck doctor, but he couldn’t tell her where her results were when he called her back on 3 April.
Her sample was transferred to Quest Diagnostics’s Chantilly laboratory in the US on 26 March. The review later found that due diligence and risk management hadn’t been performed on this facility operated by Quest – the company that tests smear samples on behalf of the HSE.
This was done to prevent the expiration of her sample. If it expired, it’d mean she’d have to get a smear test done again.
The test was carried out on 27 March at the lab but the test result report which is sent to GPs was not created.
Frustration
Still in the dark on her results, Sharon emailed the Department of Health on 3 April detailing what had happened so far. In the email, she said she was dissatisfied and said she’d bring her concerns to the media.
She received a reply that day from Minister Simon Harris’ private secretary acknowledging receipt and advising she’d receive a reply shortly.
Sharon emailed the minister’s office on 14 April, and again on 28 April. She said that her 5-month wait for these results was “totally unacceptable”.
On 30 April, she received a reply from Harris’ private secretary. It said: “The Minister acknowledges there has been an increase in the time taken to receive cervical smear test results, and would like to apologise for any distress this has caused you and assure you that this is a priority concern for his Department and the HSE.”
The private secretary also said actions were being taken to address the backlog but it would take some time to resolve. The letter also referenced how – in the context of cervical cancer normally developing over a period of 10-15 years – a delay in results “whilst undesirable is not necessarily dangerous and poses a very low risk”.
‘Insensitivity’
Sharon replied to this mail on 9 May, expressing dissatisfaction at its “insensitivity” to her condition in particular.
She contacted the department again on 16 May and 4 June as she still awaited her results.
In a phone call with the department on 5 June, Sharon was asked to contact CervicalCheck directly. She did so, and was advised that the wait time for results is 33 weeks. She asked her case be escalated.
On the following day she received an email from Minister Harris’ private secretary in which the department official requested her personal details to that the department could engage directly with the National Screening Service on her behalf.
Sharon thanked the department official and said she felt the person she spoke to from CervicalCheck “didn’t care” about her situation.
With the case now escalated, the department contacted CervicalCheck which in turn contacted Quest Diagnostics to request an update on Sharon’s case.
On 17 June – almost three full months after the test was done – a result was obtained from her sample and a report was sent to her GP.
A week later, CervicalCheck told the department that Sharon’s test had been processed and the result was with her GP but due to an “IT issue” she hadn’t received a letter which would have been the normal process.
CervicalCheck then said it was addressing the problem and all affected women would be contacted. The follow-up queries to Sharon’s case had led to the discovery that around 800 women hadn’t been informed of their results in the normal manner.
Sharon was told her results by a CervicalCheck doctor on 26 June. When she asked why she hadn’t received a letter, she was told of an “IT issue”. She spoke to her GP the following day, and then contacted the CervicalCheck doctor to ask him to escalate the issue as her GP had no idea letters “were not being sent to women”.
‘Rude’
On 8 July, Sharon phoned the Department of Health and raised a number of issues, including the delay in receiving her results, the non-issuing of letters to women and the “rude” encounter with the CervicalCheck helpline staff member.
The department official said they would follow up and have an update for Sharon the next day. That afternoon, the department sought an urgent follow up from CervicalCheck on these matters.
Also on 8 July, Sharon contacted RTÉ’s health correspondent Fergal Bowers to advise him of these matters.
The report from Professor MacCraith notes different versions offered by Sharon and the Department of Health official as to what happened next.
According to Sharon, she received a phone call at 5.30pm on 9 July from the department official and was told the HSE’s report was back and was awaiting sign off from the “department head”.
She said she asked if Minister Harris was aware of the content of the report, and was told he’d been fully briefed.
According to the department official, it is “likely” Sharon was told the current status of the report and that it awaited sign off from the Head of the National Screening Service within the HSE rather than anyone at the Department of Health.
“No report from the HSE would ever go to the Department Head for sign off. In any event, we don’t use that terminology,” the official said.
Documents meanwhile, show that Minister Harris wasn’t delivered the report until 10 July. Harris subsequently told media he wasn’t aware of the issue until this date.
‘Treated with respect’
In any case, RTÉ’s Fergal Bowers began to make enquiries to CervicalCheck and the Department of Health on these matters on 10 July.
RTÉ ran the story on the Six One News the following day.
On 26 July, Sharon received a letter from CervicalCheck. The letter did not note any abnormalities and she was was recommended a three-year recall and annual check ups.
When asked to summarise the experience, she said:
There is an absence of customer service from CervicalCheck. If I had been treated with respect, this may not have evolved like this. And also, if the Department of Health had responded to my email of 3 April, things would have been discovered earlier.
The CEO of the HSE Paul Reid told reporters yesterday that some of the women affected by this weren’t even aware yet, and would be contacted in the coming weeks.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
whenever there’s a viable flight option from Shannon I will always choose to fly from Shannon, heck I’ve gone via heathrow / paris to avoid flying from Dublin, and forget cork straight off.. the damn road to cork is a joke.
The road goes two ways you know
It’s a much better airport than Dublin and someone should tell David McWilliams that it’s in Clare not Limerick…
Shannon is a small airport. Ireland has to many airport for 6.3 million people.
Shane there is no comparison between Dublin and Shannon Airports .
Shannon passenger numbers 2013 : 1.6 million
Dublin passenger numbers 2013 : 20.3 million.
They’re not comparable .
@Michael.. you bring up a very fair point but I wasn’t comparing the traffic volumes :) but that would be a good reason why Shannon is better
Shannon airport is minutes away from the Wild Atlantic Way. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Anftlby4gSE The West’s Awake.
The problem with Shannon is that nobody wants to go there
Have flown the last few times from Shannon to visit my in laws and its a doddle.. As someone who hates travel the most important thing is NO DELAYS and NO HASSLE.. Shannon will oblige..
Contrast that with a 16 hour delay while i was 5 months pregnant in Dublin in 2008, 6 hour delay in 2008..
Gimme Shannon anyday
Good for you, but most people want to fly to Cork or Dublin, that’s why Shannon is always destined to be a bridesmaid
16 hour delays can happen anywhere and are rarely the fault of the airport.
The big advantage for an airport like Cork or Shannon is that you pass through security, immigation etc. so much faster than in a bigger airport.
However, delays are where their downside kicks in. If you pick up a long delay, large airports usually have a number of facilities where you can amuse yourself. In a small airport, if you’re lucky, you might find a decent book in the bookshop.
Pierce.. I wouldnt agree with that.. Destination choice in Shannon was limited and now that they have added more flights thanks to Michael O Leary the Airport is more successful. People are voting with their feet.
Dublin will always be the busiest airport and thats ok cos its the capital city. Was only in Cork once and it was ok. The roads into and out of both are a bloody nightmare.
Shannon is doing a fine job of serving the West. Most of dont want to go to Dublin thank you very much. Too much bloody hassle.
I don’t know how you think that Dublin airport is responsible for a 16 hour delay or that Shannon airport would never experience flight delays! Yes, Shannon is faster to pass through and you’re less likely to experience small delays but major flight delays are nothing to do with the airport.
Clearly you haven’t a notion what people want.
This is in reply to Pierce2020′s original comment.
don’t mention the war planes
Delighted that Shannon is on the up and up no thanks to Fianna Fáil or unions. Twenty years ago Shannon Mail order had a turn over of 13 million pounds equal 20 million euro went out of business thru mis management and unions. Thanks to Michael O Leary I won’t have to drive 100 miles to Kerry , or Knock forget Dublin or Cork.
Thats the problem with Ireland. So many of you choose to live in sparsely populated areas. But want a service on your doorstep. Whether its airports, jobs or broadband. 6.3 million people on the island with 12 airports. Crazy.
New Zealand with a smaller population has 40 airports with services and 12 served by international connections.The Mid west and Shannon region is not a sparsely populated area either. As it stands 2million people are now within 90 mins drive of Shannon airport.
Bobby you understand that of the 4.6 million people living in the Republic of Ireland over 3million live outside the greater Dublin area. Those people are also paying their taxes and have as much right to services as those within a stones throw of the capital.
In all fairness New Zealand is rather big compared to our little burb but I get your point. BTW Shannon was always viable but suffered by being Dublins lacky…i.e. not allowed to compete. Now all bets are off. Go Shannon.
If the state no longer has direct ownership of the 2 companies, how will this affect Shannon Free Zone in the light of EU competition law?
Do companies there benefit from a tax free status and if so should they continue to benefit?
Exactly what I was thinking Paul when I read the article. The Shannon Development Company has been offering govt tax breaks and incentives to sources tenants and customers for their premises. Assuming those tax breaks are gone with govt ownership , SDC’s costs will jump immediately without the equivalent jump in Revenue.
Folks, take a look at the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport and Communications report on the Bill. See in particular Section 5.3.1
http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/committees/transportandcommunications/Report-on-the-General-Scheme-of-the-Shannon-Aviation-Services-and-Miscellaneous-Provisions-Bill-2013-Laid-6-Nov-2013.pdf
more imaginry jobs
Great News for The Mid West
All who live in Clare,Limerick, Tipperary and North Kerry should use Shannon Airport whenever possible!
Let’s get Shannon going!
It has all the facilities. Local- long runways- pleasant staff- cheap car-parking !
Let’s get Shannon moving under new management!
I wish them well!
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say