Since coming back from the break I have noticed public interest in pretty much all matters e-Health seems to have evaporated. At the time of writing (22/01/2012)
www.Ehealthcentral.com.au has not been updated in almost 6 months - so clearly the blogger had no actual interest in e-Health other than attacking me (and a few others especially from the Australian) and getting paid. When the money ran out apparently so did his interest.
www.ehealthspace.org has not apparently been updated since before Christmas and the only contact has been a summary email on last year’s efforts
Pulse+IT (www.pulseitmagazine.com.au) continues to be busy watching the ePIP site and letting us know when some vendor or others claims compliance as well as other matters ePIP. Not much other than that recently.
Other than this there seems to be a dearth of information and very little strategic commentary indeed.
It seems to me the lack of information - and even the one or two articles in Australian Doctor and Medical Observer are not really enough given the amount spent and the ongoing amount that may be spent. At least ZDNet had a couple or reports last week and used fillers from the US to keep us alert!
I would have expected a flurry of reporting alerting all those involved to the looming ePIP deadlines etc. but it is just not happening as yet.
Theories and comments welcome. Maybe it is just a typical January but it does seem much quieter than the last few years.
Interestingly, today I got my new Medicare card and there was a small flyer on e-Health included suggesting just how good it might be to register. It will take a long time for the news to get out at the rate of turnover of these cards (about 4-5 years).
I really hope we start to see more serious reporting from the media majors and the specialist medical press going forward.
David.
8 comments:
You say public interest in ehealth has evaporated - how true. Most ehealth journalists of quality have been moved on and the Department is resting on its laurels having set up the new ePIPs. Now they say it's all up to the doctors - if they embrace the changes well and good, if they don't it's all their fault. Time will tell - real soon.
" if they embrace the changes well and good, if they don't it's all their fault"
If they don't do it, its simply because even with the ePIP incentive, the cost of adoption remains greater than the benefit.
The cost of moving to PCEHR (think regulatory compliance costs, training costs, work practice change costs, software costs, productivity costs in maintaining summary records) is likely to be high.
If the PCEHR is seen as of little clinical value, then its benefit is low.
If that is the calculus of a clinician, then you would need one bloody big incentive to make the equation balance, and I suspect the incentive would not be just a one off!
No, if adoption of PCEHR via ePIP is low, it is because PCEHR does little for clinicians, and costs them a lot, incentive or no incentive.
Bureaucrats and politicians have hunkered down. It's all up to NEHTA and the doctors now.
Why is it "up to the doctors"? They did not ask for PCEHR.
Why is it up to NEHTA? They did not conceive of or build PCEHR? They do not operate the PCEHR.
DOHA, you own this. Everybody knows that. We will not be distracted.
A committee conceived the PCEHR as an afterthought viz. National Health and Hospitals reform Commission.
ConOps 9 Sept 2011 records -
NEHTA who are responsible for managing the requirements and high-level architecture of the PCEHR System, as well as supporting the standards development process. NEHTA acts as a managing agent with the other partners on behalf of the Department of Health and Ageing.
Quod erat demonstrandum (QED -
NEHTA is responsible for definition of requirements and system design
Im afraid all you have demonstrated is that you are easily misdirected by standard bureaucratic games in which the creation of committees and the ambiguous use of words are daily-used tools in blame shifting. Do not let DOHA off the hook mate. Just because much of NEHTA's leadership have been willing collaborators does not make them the architects.
David,
I do accept some of your points - they are important. In defence of Australian Doctor, the e-PIP saga is our front page story this week - "PCEHR deadline chaos". It's about the numbers of practices that have yet to sign up and what that means. And I've got another update this week, hopefully coming out tomorrow. It does reflect the genuine angst in GP land.
On the blogger - yes all very interesting. Had an angry email "exchange" with him last year when I was trying to find out how much his contract with NEHTA was worth.
Thanks again David. Keep up the sterling work.
Paul Smith
Political editor
Australian Doctor
I have spoken to Paul Smith and Australian Doctor has and is ramping up coverage on the ePIP issue. Watch this space!
David
Post a Comment