Tuesday, July 16, 2013

This Is A Pretty Big Hurdle For The NEHRS / PCEHR To Jump Over. Docs Don’t Like It and Don’t Want To Use It.

I visited the Australian Doctor Web Site a few days ago to see how their poll on the plans for usage of the system was going.
The site is found here:
Here is what I found.

Are you taking part in the national e-health scheme and writing health summaries for PCEHRs? (Poll Closed)

Yes, I am taking part in the scheme and have already written health summaries for PCEHRs.  6.03%  (31 votes)  
Yes, I will be taking part in the scheme, but have yet to write a PCEHR health summary.  28.99%  (149 votes)  
No, I am not personally taking part, but colleagues in my practice are who I can refer patients to.  7%  (36 votes)  
No, I will never take part in the scheme and will not be promoting its use to patients.  57.98%  (298 votes)  
Total Votes: 514
You can view the results here:
This result - coming from a significant sample of the profession - tells me that the one of two things has happened. Either the PCHER has not been designed to address the clinicians needs and wants for a shared electronic system or the way the system has been implemented has not made clinicians comfortable to become involved - with concerns regarding risk, liability, insurance, security and information currency and so on.
This blog from Dr Edwin Kruys recently provides a useful list of the concerns many have.

eHealth: The good, bad and ugly



We’ve come a long way with technology in general practice. Technology should make our lives easier. However, in health-IT a good idea can easily go bad. But the opportunities are mind-boggling and we’ve got exciting years ahead of us. Let’s have a look at the good, bad and ugly in eHealth, including cyber insurance, liability issues, telehealth, mobile apps, social media and of course the PCEHR.

Read all the details here:
If the situation is to be recovered what needs to happen is that all these issues are formally address and resolved to the satisfaction of those clinicians who are involved.
Without this being done the PCEHR is a dead duck!
David.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

David - again, this poll hardly provides an answer option for all clinicians. The two options for 'No' do not allow for the situation where a clinician is not currently taking part however may in the future.

More unreliable data to add to the 'flamers'.

Anonymous said...

"The two options for 'No' do not allow for the situation where a clinician is not currently taking part however may in the future."

More drivel from the PCEHR-Failure "Deniers"!

What probability is associated with the option and term "may" here, and by "when" exactly in the “future” does this option expire that if not exercised by these elusive, evasive and obstinate clinicians will the PCEHR-Failure "Deniers" accept the reality of this inevitable eventuality and cease wasting a Dollar more of Taxpayers money?

Or is this just more biased drivel from the true PCEHR Believers that "may" (100%) be proven to be misguided technocrats when it inevitably fails?

Arguably it already has by the poor paucity of measures put forward to determine its success with the meaningless measures unmet!

More unreliable and misguided opinion reflecting the biased and poor judgement of the PCEHR ‘believers’.