Monday, September 03, 2012

AusHealthIT Poll Number 134 – Results – 3rd September, 2012.

The question was:

Do You Think The Government's Plan for Paying GPs To Set Up and Maintain NEHRS Records Is Evidence Based Or A Response To Concerns The System Will Fail.

Results were
It Is An Evidence Based Approach To Maximising Adoption 14% (6)
It Is A Policy Born Of Concern and Worry For NEHRS Failure 64% (27)
There Is Another Reason Altogether (Please Explain in Comment on Last Week's Poll) 10% (4)
I Have No Idea 12% (5)
Total votes: 42
Very interesting response. It seems most think it is a rear-guard action to stave off disaster - for a while.
Again, many thanks to those that voted!


Anonymous said...

For the next poll refer to

Dr David More MB PhD FACHI said...


Useful link. Adding each 9 after 99% gets more and more expensive!

For myself I reckon 99.9 would be acceptable - but not great. Thus far voting wants more!


Bernard Robertson-Dunn said...

The question "What Level Of Service Availability (Uptime) Is Acceptable For The NEHRS / PCEHR?" is meaningless, unless the time period over which it applies is also stated.

99.9% availability, over a year, means that the system could be down for more than 8 hours in one go and still meet the availability requirements. If the PCEHR is supposed to be important enough to influence health outcomes, I would have thought it is not a good idea for it to be down for an 8 hour period.

Availability should be specified across a number of parameters, including, but not limited to:

* Specification of an incident

* Number of permitted incidents in a specified time

* Maximum length of time an incident may last for

* Minimum gap between incidents such that they are identified as separate incidents, not the same incident

Setting and monitoring service levels is much more difficult than it seems. Health should be well aware of such issues, after its experience with its ICT outsourcer.

IMHO, such requirements should at least be public knowledge, if not the result of industry consultation.

Can anyone point to evidence of either?

Dr David More MB PhD FACHI said...

Hi Bernard,

All this reminds me of tenders I used to write where we defined both total annual, total monthly and total daily down time limits.

Obviously 1-2 mins per day is not as bad as the 28 hours we saw over the weekend as best I can tell!