Friday, August 10, 2012

Now Here Is Some Research NEHTA Should Be Participating In, Or Maybe Even Conducting in Oz. Might Be Very Useful.

This came across my radar today.

ECRI to take 'deep dive' into potential for health IT errors

By Bernie Monegain, Editor
Created 08/09/2012
PLYMOUTH MEETING, PA – To assist the healthcare community in learning about potential patient safety issues, ECRI Institute Patient Safety Organization (PSO) is currently conducting what it calls a “Deep Dive” analysis on HIT issues. The effort aims to help healthcare providers learn from HIT adverse events and help prevent similar errors, according to ECRI officials.
The goal of the program is to gather information about errors with electronic medical records (EMRs), and within other areas where technology and human factors intersect.
ECRI officials note that with ongoing efforts to improve healthcare, both the public and private sectors have invested heavily -- and will increasingly invest -- in health information technologies. When designed and used appropriately, HIT is expected to substantially improve the quality of patient care, performance of health professionals, reduce operational and administrative costs, and enhance patient safety. However, the use of new technologies often introduces new safety risks and with the tremendous incentive and pressure to implement EMR systems, there have been an increasing number of technology errors.
ECRI Institute PSO asked participating organizations to submit HIT-related events, including issues with electronic-medical records, lab systems, emergency department documentation systems, monitor interfaces, computerized physician order entry, smart pumps, bar coding and medication management systems.
More here:
All one can say is what a great idea. I hope all those NEHTA Boffins are keeping a close eye on what is being done, how it is being done and what the outcomes are.
I will certainly be watching out for any reports etc.
We certainly do not know all we might about this complex area.


Cris Kerr, Case Health, Volunteer Community Health Researcher & Advocate for the value of patient testimony said...

David is providing a great service through this blog and I'm confident he will continue the 'good fight' for all the 'right reasons'.

In Australia you need big dollars, established credentials, or an army behind you to have your voice heard, for your experience, research or views to be given due consideration, or to influence or benefit political policies, initiatives, or values.

David is in that league. He has the credentials and audience to continue to be read and heard and to make a difference, and is deserving of your continued support.

David is a doctor, and naturally, his perspective is a doctor's perspective.

Sadly there is no genuinely 'pro-active public interest system' in Australia through which we can have a transparent and balanced national consumer conversation (warts and all) about Australia's future, independent from agenda-setting commercial influencers, lobbyists, think-tanks, etc... to identify, to debate and/or agree on what Australia's values and priorities are, what's most important to us, how we can best take advantage of opportunities to improve, or best manage present and impending risks.

Australia's national conversation is constantly focussed on the present day, on the latest disaster, on what that particular day's policy release is designed to appease, or what the latest highly reactive work-around will entail.

The conflict-of-interest problems I've endeavoured to highlight and the long-term solutions I've proposed to protect against them remain invisible and are alien in the present environment.

Within that context, my focus and time has long been unproductive.

I have accepted the status quo and have reconsidered where my time might be better invested.

I know there are many different 'interested parties' that read this blog, but to-date, little expression or prioritization in the best interests of the consumer/patient. I do hope that will change.

Regardless of the origin of your initial interest or the basis of your continuing interest in ehealth, each and every one of you needs to consider that you, or someone very dear to you will one day be a patient.

At that time, quality of treatment and outcomes experienced will be based on the best available 'scientific evidence'.

At present, none of that evidence includes the actual health outcomes experienced by the person at the centre of every single healthcare activity, the patient.

Their experience and outcomes continue to be labelled as anecdotes and devalued as a potential aspect of evidence for one reason and one reason only... an anecdote is dismissed as something that is subjective and cannot be measured.

I'm at a loss to understand why I've remained the only person to espouse the virtues of a transparent health and medical research framework that includes a structured central collection of patient self-reported health outcomes (structure that would facilitate qualitative and quantitative measurement, analysis, and reporting of patient self-reported health outcomes)... however; the time has come when I must accept that clearly, without a single consensus of note over many years now... more writing, more commenting, etc, etc, from this uncredentialled volunteer community health researcher and advocate for the value of patient testimony is not going to change that status quo... difficult as it is to accept.

All my best to you, David.

Cris Kerr, Case Health
Volunteer Community Health Researcher & Advocate for the value of patient testimony
'Those Who Suffer Much, Know Much' 2010 edition

Dr David More MB PhD FACHI said...

Hi Cris,

Thanks for that. If you read my blogs closely you will see one of my major concerns is the total lack of any evidence that what the Government is presently doing will make one jot of difference to health outcomes and quality of life.

As a doctor my concern is, and has, always been to improve the health of those I care for. To date the NEHRS does not seem, to me,to be a system conceived or carefully designed with that overarching objective in mind.


Enrico Coiera said...

Australia actually has an IT incident reporting system up and running, supported by NHMRC research funds, called Techwatch.

We have had it up now for a few months and are still actively recruiting clinicians to join. If you are a GP and would like to participate in the reporting system you can either:

• Register on our website,


• Register by calling the following free number 1800 892 824 (1800 TWATCH)

It is our intention to extend in the future to other groups eg consumers, other clinical groups, and we will certainly let you know when that is possible.

Patrick G said...

Twelve years ago a government funded report came to more or less the same conclusion. Recommending, pre-Healthconnect, that a experiance rich EHealth Conversion Council be created along the lines, funding and tenure rules, of the Decimal Currency and Metric Conversion Boards (and Y2K Council for that matter). These three well run projects changed Australia for the better, to a plan and to a common purpose. What is still missing is that the current project does not have this wide ranging council of adult experts overseeing the performance outcomes. It is not too late to learn these lessons

Anonymous said...

27In fact I am not sure there are any adults at all managing DOHA or Nehta. All I ever see are spoilt brats with to much pocket money.