Friday, October 16, 2015

Now This Really Has To Be A Debacle Waiting To Happen! Or Will It Actually Happen?

This popped up a few days ago.

Trial sites selection process

A review of the PCEHR system (PCEHR Review) was undertaken in 2013. It found that there was overwhelming support for continuing implementation of a nationally consistent electronic health record system for all Australians, but that a change in approach was needed to correct early implementation issues. The PCEHR Review made thirty-eight recommendations aimed at making the system more usable and able to deliver the expected benefits in a shorter period. The recommendations include establishing new governance arrangements, moving to an opt-out system for individual participation, and improving system usability and the clinical content of records.
Announced in the 2015-16 Budget, the Government’s My Health Record Strategy responds to the key recommendations of the PCEHR Review. It includes strengthening eHealth governance and operations by establishing the Australian Commission for eHealth to manage governance, operation and ongoing delivery for national eHealth systems, trialling new participation arrangements including opt-out, improving system useability and the clinical content of records, revising incentives, and providing education and training to healthcare providers. The Government also announced that the PCEHR will be renamed the My Health Record.
Trials of participation arrangements (including opt-out trials) will be conducted in several regions in Australia. The purpose of these trials is to inform the Government on future changes to the My Health Record system to improve participation and usage, including whether to change the system to operate on an opt-out basis nationally.
To guide the selection of the opt-out trial sites the following criteria has been agreed by State and Territory Health Chief Executive Officers:
  • Site population of approximately 250,000-500,000.
  • Clearly defined geographical area so there is no confusion as to whether people are included or not.
  • Ability to confine communications, including electronic media, to the site.
  • Demonstrated existing eHealth capabilities and utilisation of eHealth services across local health services including General Practice, pharmacy, aged care services, and at least one hospital.
  • Higher than average PCEHR uptake by providers.
  • Strong clinical networks with a demonstrated commitment to the success of the trial - Primary Health Network/s, Local Hospital Network/s and any other relevant local health organisations within the trial site area.
  • Positive community engagement with, and local government commitment to, previous non-eHealth trials.
  • Not currently involved in, or minimal involvement with, other State, Territory and/or Commonwealth run trial activities (for example the NDIS).
  • Include a range of population groups (i.e. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, CALD backgrounds.
  • At least one of the opt-out trial sites to include rural and/or remote areas.
In July 2015, the Minister for Health wrote to all Health Ministers inviting proposals for possible opt-out trial sites. These proposals will be assessed having regard to these criteria.
An independent evaluation of the trials will be undertaken in 2016.
Here is the link:
What is most interesting here is to try and think just where might be a few sites that fit these criteria considering the low level of both consumer and provider adoption of the PCEHR.
Also of interest, with this page having appeared October 6, 2015, is the timing of all this. Given site selection and presumably the actual trial methodologies are still underway it seems unlikely the trials could actually get underway until February 2016.
To actually run the trial and then evaluate the outcome by the end of 2016 seems a bit of a stretch if the trial is actually going to be seriously useful and credible - as well as - most importantly - what wrinkes are identified and how they are to be remedied.
Taking a group of 250,000 people is going to throw up an amazing amount of issues in terms of mobility, language, mental capacity, access to the internet etc.etc. The plans as to how all this will be handled will be pretty important - and needs to be out well in advance.
I really wonder just how far this will all get, even by the end of 2016!


Anonymous said...

The amount of repetition (same words, same, sentences, same paragraphs) spewing forth from all the speakers seems to suggest they have all been given the same few pages of briefing background notes from which to cut and paste the bits that sound good to them, and then to insert a few wraparound sentences that well up from the depths of their beings to make it appear they all know what they are talking about; which quite clearly they don't.

Anonymous said...

"Taking a group of 250,000 people is going to throw up an amazing amount of issues in terms of mobility, language, mental capacity, access to the internet etc.etc. The plans as to how all this will be handled will be pretty important - and needs to be out well in advance."

Unless they ignore the data and do what they want to anyway. Oh, come to think of it, that's what they always do.