A special week with 2 polls!
Do You Think The Consent Model For The PCEHR Should Be Changed From Opt-In To Opt-Out. i.e. The Population Should All Be Enrolled In The PCEHR Unless They Actively Decline To Be Enrolled?
I Strongly Favour Opt-Out 14% (11)I Favour Opt-Out 8% (6)
I Favour Opt-In 4% (3)
I Strongly Favour Opt-In 71% (56)
I Have No Idea 4% (3)
Total votes: 79
Opt-In is certainly the favoured approach on this blog.
Should The PCEHR Review Recommend That The PCEHR Program Be Cancelled?
Definitely 70% (55)Probably 11% (9)
Possibly 3% (2)
Definitely Not 16% (13)
I Have No Idea 0% (0)
Total votes: 79
It seems that the review should recommend ending the suffering.
Again, many, many thanks to those that voted!
David.
3 comments:
Hi David,
First things first... I hope you and your loved ones enjoy a Happy Christmas day, holiday period, and a great start to 2014.
Second... Haven't visited for a while but I noticed today that PulseIT's Dec13 4-part ehealth review stated incorrectly that the Consumers Health Forum (CHF) had recently changed their position from being pro opt-in to pro opt-out.
That's not correct.
I attended a couple of ehealth forums way back in 2011 and reps of CHF also attended.
CHF most definitely (on stage at one of the 2011 forums) vocally expressed a preference for patients to have to opt-out of the PCEHR system.
I have always been pro opt-in, so was very surprised to hear CHF, an organisation that is relied upon to represent and express the views of all Australian health consumers, vocally support an opt-out system for all health consumers.
If CHF ever supported opt-in, it would have to have been sometime before the 2011 forum when they expressed a preference for opt-out.
Just setting the record straight on the only site (thank you) that will print and not delete my feedback and comments :-)
However in the original published CHF response to the Concept of Operations in 2011 – see here -
https://www.chf.org.au/pdfs/sub/sub-803-Con-Ops-Response-Oct-2011.pdf
The CHF recommended an opt-out model, but with other recommendations to ensure consumer confidence and privacy.
It is interesting to go back and read this and other responses to the Concept of Operations in 2011, as some recommendations make absolute sense, and yet have not been considered. One wonders if anyone ever bothered to read them in the senseless rush to get something up by the promised go live date, faulty as it was. This probably contributed more than any other factor to undermining consumer and provider confidence in the system.
"One wonders if anyone ever bothered to read them..."
There's a difference between reading them and understanding them.
My guess is that they wrote the RFT and picked what they thought would work.
No real analysis of the requirements against the proposed solutions - just a "best fit" selection. In this sort of environment, best fit doesn't work.
As long as process is followed, that's all that matters.
Post a Comment