If digital tools are proven to save time and improve care, why does progress still vary so widely? Michelle Corrigan at Chief Executive at Digital Care Hub, argues that confidence, culture and practical support matter just as much as the technology itself.
It is worth challenging one assumption behind this question. Every care provider already uses digital technology. Even where systems are not designed specifically for social care, providers rely on spreadsheets, emails, text messages and online systems to run services day to day. Digital care does not start from zero. The real question is how far providers can go, and at what pace.
The sector has made genuine progress. Around 80% of providers now use a Digital Social Care Record, and uptake of the Data Security and Protection Toolkit has increased from around 15% in 2021 to over 75% today. That shift reflects growing confidence, clearer expectations and better support. It shows that when digital change is clearly linked to everyday practice, adoption can be rapid.
So, what slows adoption elsewhere, even when the benefits seem obvious on paper? Change is always challenging. Many providers tell us it is not a lack of interest, but a lack of confidence. There can be a feeling that you need to be a digital or data expert to make the right decisions. Alongside this sit long-term investment considerations and competing priorities. In a pressured system, introducing something new has to justify the time as well as the cost.
Expecting digital transformation to succeed in services that are overstretched, under resourced or short staffed is undeniably difficult. This is why the business case matters. Digital tools need to demonstrate that they reduce administrative burden, free up staff time and support better care. Digital care records, in particular, are becoming a basic cost of doing business, with strong evidence that they save time and improve oversight. Increasingly, we also need to recognise the cost of not adopting digital approaches.
Fit for practice is another crucial factor. Digital tools often fall short because they do not reflect the pace, pressure or workflow of frontline care. Even when systems do not fail outright, they can struggle to deliver their full value. This is why co-design and co-introduction between care providers and suppliers are so important. Failure is also part of learning, particularly with emerging technologies such as AI. What matters is learning safely and adapting quickly.
Trust among care workers is central. Experiences are mixed, especially at the early stages of introduction. Poorly implemented technology can feel like extra admin or surveillance. But when data is used alongside professional judgement, the benefits become clearer. For example, sensor technology has helped providers identify patterns contributing to falls and intervene earlier, with some reporting a 50% reduction in falls and faster response times. In these cases, technology supports judgement rather than replacing it.
What also makes a real difference is the right kind of support. Programmes such as Digitising Social Care combined upfront investment with practical guidance, helping providers take first steps with confidence. Digital Care Hub’s Better Security, Better Care programme has shown the value of tailored support delivered through trusted trade associations that understand providers’ concerns and realities. This kind of peer-informed, practical support builds confidence far more effectively than generic guidance alone.
Looking ahead, suppliers need to design not just for today’s sector, but for the one that is emerging. Systems must be adaptable, interoperable and secure, able to work with NHS infrastructure and evolving expectations. As digital natives age and AI becomes more embedded, issues of access, bias and transparency will only become more important.
Digital care is already making a positive difference. The challenge now is to build on that progress with honesty, collaboration and the right support, recognising that innovation takes time as well as money.
