What’s inside: routing · audit trail
The question this file answersIs a subject-access request really waiting behind a solicitor's letter because they landed in the same inbox?
Fits: clinics and hospital groups where referrals, discharge papers and records still move by fax and email.
Typical pattern, not a measured records office — the healthcare playbook has no volume for this desk, and none is claimed. Subject-access, solicitor and clinician-to-clinician requests share one queue; routine copies wait behind legal ones while the statutory clock runs on all. Worst when a deadline and a court date coincide.
Each morning the records officer sees a deadline-ordered list: the routine copies ready to check and release, and the handful of legal or safeguarding files that need their judgement first. Redaction is still done by a person, on a file that is already gathered.
Typical, not a measured client result. Every figure here comes from the playbook source named below.
routine, legal, clinical — triage only; disclosure still has a person; no published figure for this desk
Before: subject-access, solicitor and clinical requests share one queue. After: three queues, each with its deadline, and routine copies gathered for a person to release. The hero is a count of queues, not a percentage nobody has measured.
Records-request handling has no published benchmark, so no percentage appears here. Routine copies are gathered from the record for a person to check; redaction, legal and safeguarding stay with named people. Not a GDPR/HIPAA compliance claim.
Nothing is installed in place of your EHR, whether that is Epic, Cerner or MEDITECH. Same sorting-and-assembly build as our referral file, facing outwards:
Redaction. Legal disclosure. Safeguarding. The release that is not a PDF dump.
Not a GDPR/HIPAA compliance claim.
Redaction judgement is not automated; a routine copy still needs a person's eyes before release, so the gain is in gathering and tracking, not in disclosure. Requests by post and fax must be scanned before anything can be read. No benchmark exists for this desk; the NHS Digital referral figure on the parent file is about inbound letters and is not transferred — and this is not a GDPR or HIPAA compliance claim.
The path: free 60-second estimate → free 20-minute review → paid audit of this one process (€1.5–3K, typically two weeks) → pilot with your people in the loop (€10–20K, weeks, not quarters). No transformation programme. Prices are public, on the services page →
Scoped in the audit — the playbook has no estimate for this exact desk.
That depends on your volumes and wage costs — this page will not invent the number. The free 60-second estimate runs that calculation from your answers, with every multiplier sourced.
Not a named Aperanda client. Process file · Healthcare.
Short process file. Same build as its parent file; the playbook has no separate volume or benchmark for this desk.