Probe into new screening scandal begins
AN investigation into the latest CervicalCheck scandal – which saw 800 women left without their smear results because of an ‘IT glitch’ at a US lab – will report back a number of weeks.
The latest controversy in the ongoing saga has prompted a fresh review which got under way yesterday. The HSE says the issue relates to one of Quest Diagnostics’ laboratories, based at Chantilly in Virginia, which had delayed issuing cervical screening HPV retest results to some women and their GPs due to IT problems that impacted on how result letters were electronically triggered.
Since the reports reached the media last week, Paul Reid, CEO of the HSE, has commissioned an independent rapid review to determine the facts. Professor Brian MacCraith, president of Dublin City University, was announced as chairman of the CervicalCheck Rapid Review on Monday. He says he has met with Mr Reid and the review has begun. ‘The review will examine the series of events within the CervicalCheck programme that occurred following reported IT issues in Quest Diagnostics relating to the HPV test expiration for a number of women and the retesting process,’ Mr MacCraith added.
‘The period of the review will be from the time the IT issues first emerged up to, and including, the public reporting of these issues on July 11, 2019, and confined to those events. The HSE CEO impressed upon me the need for the review to be completed as quickly as possible and I have committed to reporting to him by August 2.’
Minister for Health Simon Harris has come under criticism from political rivals over when and how he was made aware of the issue. Sinn Féin health spokeswoman Louise O’Reilly has called on the minister to clarify what he knew.
‘The minister states he did not become aware of the issue until July 10,’ she said.
‘However, new correspondence shows the minister’s office were contacted about the matter on June 6 and a reply was issued in the minister’s name intimating he had been made aware of the matter. This new information raises many questions and in the interest of clarity the minister now needs to clarify his timeline of events and confirm what he knew, and when he knew it.
‘This is a matter which should have been immediately brought to the minister’s attention, and if he is claiming it was not, then it raises questions about why his department was not willing or capable of bringing it to his attention.’
A spokesman for Mr Harris said: ‘The minister’s position has not changed .... The department immediately engaged with the HSE to seek clarity about what the issue was. This report was received on July 10. The minister was informed of the issue that evening.’