Provider defines the cohort
Set inclusion and exclusion criteria, consent route, episode length, photograph schedule and clinical ownership.
For NHS and care providers
A clearer digital pathway for earlier review of visible change.
Healing Process is designed to help services receive more comparable photographs, understand patient-reported change and manage review activity in one auditable workflow. It is supplementary technology: the provider remains responsible for the clinical service, staffing, governance and decisions.
Click to inspectEvery product image on this and all other pages opens full screen with high-resolution zoom.
Procurement and deployment status: these pages and policies are a comprehensive design-and-governance package, not evidence of NHS approval, DTAC conformity, medical-device registration or completion of a clinical safety case. Each claim must be substantiated before procurement or live use.
What changes operationally
From isolated photographs to a governed review pathway
The product should be configured around the provider’s existing service model—not presented as a stand-alone inbox.
Person captures consistently
Baseline guides and quality controls reduce avoidable variation while retaining the unaltered source image.
System routes transparently
Submission status, image-quality limitations and apparent-change signals are kept separate from clinical urgency.
Team reviews in context
Authorised staff see identifiers, originals, notes, history, communication and local protocol information.
Action is completed
Advice, appointment, assessment, escalation or planned review receives a named owner and time.
Learning is measured
Audit timeliness, failed contacts, escalation, equity, usability, safety incidents and clinical outcomes.
Dashboard experience
Read the detail without squinting
All smaller portal images below are selectable. The full-screen viewer displays the original high-resolution asset with zoom, reset and close controls.
Service modes
Do not blur personal use and commissioned monitoring
No provider queue
The individual may use photographs and notes to support their own recollection and choose to share an export. The website and app must not imply that an NHS team sees or acts on entries.
Required label: “Private record—no care team is monitoring this account.”
Locally configured review service
The provider defines users, authorised roles, operating hours, response expectation, escalation and record integration.
Required label: “Linked to [service]. Reviewed [hours]. For urgent help use [route].”
Assurance workstreams
A structured route through digital, clinical and organisational assurance
| Workstream | Examples of evidence | Provider decision |
|---|---|---|
| Clinical safety | Clinical safety officer, intended-use statement, hazard log, clinical safety case, change control, incident process and deployment safety case responsibilities. | Whether risks and local controls are acceptable for the pathway. |
| Medical-device status | Documented intended purpose, functionality assessment, regulatory advice, classification rationale, quality management and post-market plan where applicable. | Whether the product may lawfully be placed on the market and used for the proposed purpose. |
| Data protection | Controller/processor mapping, Article 6 and Article 9 conditions, DPIA, privacy information, contracts, retention, subject rights and international-transfer assessment. | Whether processing is lawful, necessary and proportionate. |
| Security | Architecture, encryption, identity and access, tenant separation, logging, vulnerability management, penetration test, incident response, backup and recovery. | Whether residual cyber and information risks are acceptable. |
| Interoperability | Identifiers, coding, APIs, structured outputs, record-writeback, messaging, error handling and data portability. | How the service fits the authoritative record and clinical workflow. |
| Usability and accessibility | WCAG testing, assistive-technology testing, accessible-information workflow, language/interpreter routes, user research and reasonable-adjustment support. | Whether the service can be used equitably by the intended population. |
Implementation decisions
Questions to answer before a pilot starts
Clinical model
- Which visible conditions or episodes are in scope?
- Which findings require direct examination?
- What is the review frequency?
- Who owns escalation and out-of-hours advice?
People and access
- Who may enrol, capture, review and message?
- How are identity, consent, carers and proxies verified?
- What training and competency are required?
- How are access and leavers reviewed?
Information flow
- What enters the patient record?
- How are originals and derivatives labelled?
- How long is each item retained?
- What happens during downtime or integration failure?
Evaluation
Test the pathway, not just the software
A controlled pilot should measure image comparability, review timeliness, escalation, appointments, safety events, patient confidence, staff workload, inclusion and unintended consequences against a documented baseline.
Safety
Missed deterioration, false reassurance, delayed review, wrong-patient and failed-message events.
Quality
Image acceptance, repeated capture, review completion and record completeness.
Experience
Patient, carer and staff usability, accessibility and communication confidence.
Value
Travel avoided, appointments changed, staff time, service capacity and cost consequences.
Move from concept to a controlled deployment
The supplied checklist turns product, clinical, data, equality, security and operating questions into named evidence and approval gates.