Chamber and committees

Finally from me, how do we take the knowledge that we are gathering on long Covid and educate our community about what long Covid looks like? The other thing that we hear a lot is that long Covid numbers are an estimate, because many people who have symptoms that could be long Covid do not come forward. How do we furnish our communities with that knowledge so that people know to come forward?

Do we have an information technology system in Scotland that allows for the proper deployment and sharing of data across the whole system?

Excellent.

I will broaden out that question to you, Euan. We have always heard that Scotland is fantastic at gathering data—that we have a phenomenal ability to do that. However, given the practicalities of informing our GPs at the front line about what to look for in Covid and of deploying resources to help patients at the front line, our ability to deploy that data is not good. That is what we are hearing just now—that that element is not good.

Where are we with that, and what do we need to do to ensure that our healthcare professionals are properly informed about the issues around long Covid? We have even heard that some of them still do not believe in long Covid—they feel that there is a mental health issue around long Covid. The reality is that long Covid exists. How are we going to get to a point at which all that gathered data is available to our healthcare professionals so that they can deploy the resources?

Good morning. My interest in health is around the gathering and deployment of data. Do we have a system that allows for the effective deployment of data? We gather data, but do we have a system that, in practice, allows that data to be crunched and deployed, such that effectiveness is measured as we consider how the data ends up being used in the treatment of patients? To date, we have heard from clinicians and from sufferers of long Covid that the investigation and the data are not allowing for effective treatment on the front line.

I put that to you first, Professor Robertson, as a statistician and a non-clinician. Is that right?

That leads me to another question. As I have said, the quality of research in Scotland is world renowned, but, at the end of the day, it is about how you deploy that effectively on the ground. Can any of the other witnesses—I am looking at you, Dr Scott—help me understand how that data is being deployed to help patients, because that is what we are trying to do?

I was interested to hear you say that you have access to data on 5.1 million Scots. That is a significant pool of data from which you can draw. However, for that to be useful, people would first have to suspect or know that they have long Covid and they would then have to access a GP to be diagnosed, or at least be signposted somewhere by their GP to be diagnosed. They would then have to be able to identify a treatment.

You gave the figure of 5.1 million people, but the research that we have done and the evidence that we have taken suggest that there is a problem, especially in more deprived areas, to do with people who potentially have long Covid coming forward.

That seems fair.

Professor Dominiczak, we have heard what Dr Scott said about how that information is now being deployed. How are we ensuring that that good practice is being reflected across the whole of each NHS board? We are hearing that it is patchy and that it is a bit of a postcode lottery with regard to whether people can access any treatment for long Covid, let alone diagnosis. How are we ensuring that that practice is deployed across the whole country?

I will reverse a wee bit and ask you to clarify one point that you made. Are you suggesting that the ability for a GP to point to a long Covid service actually dictates where long Covid diagnoses are likely to spring up?

The outcomes from the development of long Covid clinics are not only about the ability to diagnose and treat. Does that mean that long Covid clinics are a conduit for gathering that important data?