Tuesday, 26 November 2019

Ceisteanna (98, 116)

Catherine Connolly

Ceist:

98. Deputy Catherine Connolly asked the Minister for Health when the review of CervicalCheck by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists due in May 2019 will be published; if his attention has been drawn to the report; the investigation he has undertaken to establish the way in which information from the report was leaked to the media; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48889/19]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Alan Kelly

Ceist:

116. Deputy Alan Kelly asked the Minister for Health the way in which the review by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists was leaked before all participating women were informed; and the steps he will take regarding same. [48824/19]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí scríofa (Ceist ar Health)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 98 and 116 together.

As the Deputy will be aware, the purpose of the Independent Clinical Expert Review being conducted by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) is to provide women, or their next of kin, with independent clinical assurance about the timing of their diagnosis and treatment.

The overriding focus throughout this process has been to ensure that Review results are communicated to women and families in the most appropriate and sensitive way possible. A core principle underpinning this process has been to ensure that individual participants would have had an opportunity to receive their results in advance of publication of the Expert Panel’s Aggregate Report. In keeping with this principle, I will only receive the aggregate report when I have been assured that all women or next of kin have had the opportunity to receive their individual report. I will then bring the aggregate report to Government and publish it.

While the aggregate report has not yet been received by my Department, the Royal College in a letter addressed to me in September 2019 advised that, based on the provisional findings of its Review, the performance characteristics of the CervicalCheck Screening Programme that fall within the scope of the Review appear to be broadly in line with experience in the UK.