An informant has just let me know the NEHTA web site has had a major facelift.
Go to www.nehta.gov.au to experience the new site.
We also seem to have another new Director – here is what the site tells us.
Dr Peter Flett
Dr Peter Flett graduated in medicine in Adelaide, South Australia. After four years in the Royal Australian Air Force he undertook specialist chemical pathology training in Melbourne. He moved to Perth where he worked for 20 years in the private sector of pathology with a consultancy to the King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women. His current roles are Chief Executive of PathWest (the public pathology arm of the Department of Health of WA) and Area Chief Executive of the South Metropolitan Area Health Service, which oversees two major tertiary hospitals and several secondary hospitals.
Welcome and good luck Peter!
This means we now have 2 of 10 directors with a clinical background. My view is that that is still at least 2-3 too few!
The other distinct lack is that there is not a single Health IT expert on the Board – just how can that be justified?
Happy New Year to all!
David.
14 comments:
Dr Flett may be able to address a concern about the ability of SNOMED to characterise microorganisms.
My experience of pathology is that data storage is driven by the anatomical and chemical sub-disciplines. Both are satisfied by flat-file databases, but microbiology demands a hierarchical design. This is not a trivial issue in the context of biosecurity. Oh well, another one through to the safe hands of management.
The revamped web site gives NEHTA a much needed ‘new’ clean fresh image - to be applauded by all. The new NEHTA - like a breath of fresh air.
Some observations:
1. Where are NEHTA’s past Annual Reports. Good governance suggests they should be available to anyone who wants to access them?
2. The majority of past presentations have disappeared.
It’s a pity they are not accessible from an Archived Link - for research and reference purposes.
3. The Links to External Websites is interesting.
HealtheLinkEHR is given prominence among these links. Are there no others worth mentioning?
4. HealthConnect seems to be alive and well except for those ‘States’ where the entry says “No HealthConnect website has been established at this time.”
5. References to the original CEO have been almost entirely erased.
The new NEHTA - like breath of fresh air. Welcome to 2010.
I think you mean - Welcome to 2009 - to which I too would heartily agree.
Point 1 - should be rectified.
Point 2 - archived access to past presentations is problematic as many were by the chap referenced in point 5 and are therefore best 'erased'.
Point 3 - might simply be a clue to where NEHTA is heading.
Point 4 - is more of a DOHA identity crisis rather than anything to do with NEHTA.
Point 5 is cause for much joy.
Happy New Year NEHTA.
In the light of the current influenza season in the UK, being tagged "killer Brisbane flu", I ask again about the ability of SNOMED to hold searchable data on microorganisms. If similar strains of influenzavirus come back here, how will EHRs cope with the detail? Eg, A (H3) A/Brisbane/10/2007 (H3N2)-like. Most of the current isolates in US and UK are resistant to oseltamivir (Tamiflu).
It's such a pity that no organisation structure is available. We can see the Board and CEO each with a mugshot and short profile. But under the CEO - we have nothing. No organisation structure, no positions, and no senior managers identified.
Does the Board have a chart of the organisation structure? It should have and it should also be available on the web site. Come on NEHTA, lift your standards.
Commentator (Thursday, January 01, 2009 11:19:00) makes a very valid point. An organisation which has $216 million of public taxpayer funds to spend over 3 years and which employs upwards of 150 people should make a high level organisation chart available in the interests of transparency and accountability. The absence of such is probably more an oversight in the newly revamped web site and hopefully will be rectified in the next couple of weeks.
The description of the site mirrors what routinely happens to Federal departmental sites. A re-vamp is usually a means to erasing corporate memory and access to outsiders to the 'the past'. You then don't have so much trouble having to justify what you said you'd do previously, and the site can confine itself to the current party line.
Plus my RSS link has stopped working.
Not an optimistic sign.
Peter Flett's bio is also a little out of date. He is currently the Director General of the WA Department of Health.
It is a pity that this is not an additional clinical director - but a clinician director is better than a non-clinician when they are in such a minority. Thanks for the role update!
I wonder what ever happened to the new non-health department CEO appointments we were promised?
David.
It's a pity NEHTA (or the Corporate Secretary) can't keep info up-to-date and accurate.
For example:
"Mick Reid -Mick Reid is the chief of staff for Federal Health Minister Nicola Roxon, and Director-General of Queensland Health."
It is not humanly possible to be both.
For the record he is (presently) Director-General of Queensland Health.
David.
"This means we now have 2 of 10 directors with a clinical background. My view is that that is still at least 2-3 too few!"
1) Dr Tony Sherbon MB BS
2) Dr David Ashby MB BS
3) Dr Peter Flett MB BS
4) Prof Debora Picone, Professor, University of Wollongong; Clinical Professor, Prince of Wales Clinical School; and Clinical Associate Professor, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Sydney, RN (maybe nurses don't count as "clinical" on this blog)
That's 4 by my count.
Secondly, my understanding is that NEHTA's constitution dictates that the directors comprise the heads of the various health departments, plus at this point, Mr Gonski. It is not NEHTA's fault that the Governments select non-clinicians to head up Health Departments.
Sorry,
I missed Dr Ashbridge (not Ashby) and Ms Picone..
Worthy people I am sure.
However - all are administrators and none have deep Health IT knowledge. So why are they running the peak Health IT organisation in the country - as of the present.
The Board is a joke and needs a total revamp!
David.
This is confusing. The Board is criticised for not having enough clinicians. Four members are identified as having Medical/Nursing backgrounds. Then they are criticised for not having deep Health IT knowlege, so the arguments are inconsistent.
The Board is there to run a business. Their capacity to perform that role is what should be questioned.
The core issue is that NEHTA is a company limited by guarenttee, it is not. Resolving that issue would resolve the how the peak Health IT organisation is directed and managed.
Post a Comment