Sunday, April 10, 2016

AusHealthIT Poll Number 315 – Results – 10th April, 2016.

Here are the results of the poll.

Could The $450M Planned To Be Spent On The myHR Be Better Spent On Other E-Health Initiatives?

Yes 58% (83)

No 8% (11)

I Have No Idea 35% (50)

Total votes: 144

An interesting poll result with a majority seeing better possible uses for the funds in e-Health - or maybe spending on something other than e-Health preferred by some?

Only 8% think myHR spending is a great idea it seems.

Again Ms Ley should take careful notice!

Really great turnout of votes!

Again, many, many thanks to all those that voted!

David.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

"I Have No Idea 35% (50)"

This surprised me more! (and I voted "Yes")

If the governing party's goal is to confuse healthcare professionals and the electorate into a protracted, ongoing, passive state, its seems to be working!

Perhaps I should be not so surprised, there seems to be little advocacy of alternatives, or those alternatives are not given fair publicity.

Bernard Robertson-Dunn said...

There are two types of alternatives:

1. An alternative opt-out national health record system that duplicates existing or future practitioner based eHR systems, is attached to the internet, has dubious security (ID/password is so last century for sensitive data) and doesn't actually deliver better health care, but is a risk to privacy.

or

2. No national health record system at all.

I go for 2. Or failing that keep it opt-in and let the patient decide.

And on privacy, this is what the Parliamentary Joint Committee said in its report last year on the eHealth Bill 2015.

"The committee also notes the minister's statement that the move to automatically upload everyone's personal health records onto the national database is 'likely to improve privacy' for individuals, as it will decrease reliance on paper records.

However, it is not apparent that including all personal health data on a centralised national database would better protect privacy – information on government databases also run the risk of being inappropriately accessed, and including more personal information that can be accessed by more people is not likely to improve the right to privacy for individuals."

And Philip Ruddock (Chair at the time) is such a lefty wimp.

Oh, and the draft Digital Health Strategy ignore this report. They probably didn't even know about it, being buried up to their eyes in buzzwords such as Digital Health.

Anonymous said...

....being buried up to their eyes in buzzwords such as Digital Health.

Oh Bernard, surely you can do better than that ..... how about something that says it all like .... "something that takes the personalisation of health care to an entirely new level" ...... wait for it ..... Precision Medicine (Ref p17) .... it's so all encompassing, it takes in everything - oooohh la la.

Anonymous said...

Can't wait to the next revision, will it include old favourites like disruptive and agile, both now falling out of favour by the most hardened buzzword evangelists. This sadly is very much looking like a rebranding exercise.

Bernard Robertson-Dunn said...

"Oh Bernard, surely you can do better than that..."

I'm sorry, I apologise, I'll try and do better next time.