- Comprehensive (complete).
- Stored in only one place, and updated at that place (the “single-instance storage” concept and practice).
- Universally compatible and interoperable.
Thursday, January 16, 2014
The Failure Of Google Health Seems To Have A Lot Of Commonality With The Present PCEHR Situation.
This appeared a little while ago.
In his Second Opinion column, Dr Constantine Constantinides from healthCare cybernetics looks at why “Google Health” failed…the Electronic Health Record “Death Trap” and its implications for Medical Tourism
If you were wondering what ever happened to the Google Health initiative … Let me provide some background to the death of Google Health.
What Google announced was this:
"Google Health has been permanently discontinued. All data remaining in Google Health user accounts as of January 2, 2013 has been systematically destroyed, and Google is no longer able to recover any Google Health data for any user. To learn more about this announcement, see our blog post, or answers to frequently-asked questions below"
Even Google couldn’t master the concept of the Universal eHealth Record!
Meaning… the “single-instance storage” concept and practice.
Late in life, I came to the conclusion that in many instances, success hinges on the “single-instance storage” concept and practice. With healthCare cybernetics (hCc), I am still struggling with the challenge of adopting and implementing the principle and practice.
For the EHR to succeed it must, likewise, be based on the “single-instance storage” concept and practice.
Practically all who claim to be in the business of “Medical Tourism” seem to know about the Electronic Health Record – eHealth Record – EHR - (and some feel confident enough to express informed opinions on the subject). Some who are in the medical tourism business feel even more confident enough to want to establish a proprietary eHealth Record System – to be adopted and used “by one and all”.
Everyone wants to be the keeper of your eHealth record!
I emphasise …single and universal
The Universal eHealth Record continues to confound even the best brains in the field of health informatics. And here, we are talking about the Universal eHealth Record – and not an eHealth Record system designed to satisfy the limited (and short-sighted) needs of a hospital or medical practice.
For an eHealth Record System to be “universally” and practically useful, it needs to be:
This ideal eHealth Record System continues to elude us.
No single eHealth Record system yet introduced has been adopted by the number of users required for the “tipping point” to be reached.
And of course, the introduction of more and more eHealth Record systems, specifically for medical tourists, is not helping matters or the health consumer.
The full article (with lots more on medical tourism etc.) is here:
While not sure I am totally comfortable with what is said here there is certainly a sensible basis here and the article is pointing out what has always been important and which the PCEHR just ignored.
I wonder what happens next.
Posted by Dr David More MB PhD FACHI at Thursday, January 16, 2014