I thought I would take a few rough notes for readers here. E & O E!
Relevant Section -Outcome 7 - E-Health Started 08:34 pm.
Lots of waffle on NICNAS and FSANZ. (Chemicals and Cosmetics!!)
8:58 pm Moved on to TGA.
Refused to discuss medical cannabis….. Questions since June from all sorts of Senators.
Australian Medical Devices are now more able to get easier conformity assessment if approved in EU or, I assume, US.
Outcome 7 - Finished at 9:14pm.
We know where e-Health is heading now - Into Oblivion!
Sleep Well and what a farce - zero accountability!
David.
4 comments:
Nobody's interested in the PCEHR. Not Senators, not doctors, not specialists, not paramedics, not patients - no one. Apart from a few techos who might make a buck.
Oh, and the tragics who read and post to this site. And that must include me.
I feel a great sadness coming on.
Wow! After all that! I'm sure it will rumble on for a few years still. Too much time and money has been spent for them to pretend it never existed. If not actively discussed, then rival parties will use it as a stick to beat each other with.
To the first commenter - It's a shame because they (I believe) have set the infrastructure in place to make it very useful. The only issue being that the one thing that has been ignored (a big one as far as user uptake is concerned), is the usability of the whole system. It is atrocious!
To combine the sentiments of the previous two comments, yes it's sad that the big issue of usability has not been addressed.
And by usability I mean the value of using it, not just the ease of using it. Infrastructure is all well and good, but it needs to be leveraged to deliver value.
To return to the bridge metaphor, it starts in the wrong place, goes to the wrong place and is too narrow to carry decent traffic. It may be a nice bridge (and I doubt even that) but as the first commenter said, nobody is interested in using it. They all want to stay on the side of the canyon where they currently are.
IMHO, the best way to get to a better place is if someone leads you there. And if there is one thing missing in this whole sorry business, it's leadership.
Building a bit of infrastructure is not leadership, it's ideology and a failure of logic:
eHealth is about using IT to deliver better health care.
The PCEHR is IT.
Therefore we will get better health care.
The first two statements are defensible. The conclusion is wrong.
Sad is a good word in this context.
A good phrase is "white elephant"
Quickest way to kill it off is to give it to Telstra.
Post a Comment