Skip to main content

🔍 Why Hippo Builds Its Own Searches Instead of Using Ardens or PCIT?

This article explains why Hippo Labs builds its own clinical searches for campaigns rather than using providers like Ardens or Primary Care IT (PCIT).

Updated over 2 weeks ago

Broadly, campaigns fall into two categories: those with published guidance and those without.

Most of our campaigns are based on published guidance from NHS England, e.g.:

For campaigns without published NHSE guidance, Hippo Labs’ clinical team build searches according to the most relevant clinical specification and benchmarks, often based on authoritative resources such as:

There are numerous reasons why the numbers in a Hippo-built campaign might differ from other ‘gold-standard’ searches that practices may use, such as Ardens or EMIS Library searches. These include:

  • Subtle differences in how timeframes are defined (e.g. QOF/financial year versus last 12 months)

  • Subtle differences in defining targets, e.g.

    • How hypertension is defined between NHSE and NICE CKS (NHSE aim for ≤140/90, NICE aim for <140/90)

  • Subtle differences in defining patient groups, e.g.

    • How immunosuppression is defined between NHSE guidance and the Green Book

    • When a patient becomes eligible for a campaign

The small differences as outlined above will often ultimately result in the majority of the same people being invite over time, but - if checking on a single day - the numbers in a Hippo Labs’ campaign versus an Ardens/EMIS Library search will typically differ.

Hippo Labs strive to have the most clinically accurate indicators, based on the most up-to-date guidance, and these are rigorously quality-tested prior to deployment.

Did this answer your question?