Quote Of The Year

Timeless Quotes - Sadly The Late Paul Shetler - "Its not Your Health Record it's a Government Record Of Your Health Information"


H. L. Mencken - "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

Tuesday, August 25, 2015

We Really Have To Hope That The New ACeH Will Be Rather More Open And Better Than NEHTA.

This appeared a few days ago.

NEHTA Dose Based Prescribing Reference Sets open for review

Created on Friday, 21 August 2015
As part of ongoing product development NEHTA conducted a market survey to identify potential areas of improvement to the Australian Medicines Terminology (AMT). The survey results were used to prioritise areas for development.  One priority area identified was dose based prescribing (acute care).
Through a series of workshops and previous communications, NEHTA engaged with clinical representatives from various state health jurisdictions, vendors who provide software to those jurisdictions, and others in an effort to define standardised terminology to support dose based prescribing. 
An open review of the resulting draft reference sets is now underway. 
If you are interested in participating in the review, please contact Naomi Graham on email Naomi.Graham@nehta.gov.au or phone (02) 8298 2693.   Feedback is due by close of business Friday 4 September to Emma.Black@nehta.gov.au.
All feedback will be collated and analysed to form the final content for the first release of Route of Administration, Dosage Form and Dose Frequency reference sets. The reference sets are scheduled for the November 2015 release of SNOMED CT-AU. 
The release is found here:
A few of questions.
1. Where is the link to the list of priorities and how they were ranked with an explanation of how the survey was being conducted and who was consulted?
2. What were the previous communications?
3. Why an emphasis on providers to the jurisdictions - what about the rest of the e-Health domain.
4. Why does the release not explain what a ‘Dose Based Prescribing Reference Sets’ are?
5. Why just a couple of weeks to respond?
It is because of this sort of nonsense we are seeing the back of NEHTA - and frankly they richly deserve to be going - given their non-transparency and failure to understand they exist to serve NOT rule!
Good riddance - you have been a dismal failure. If, as an organisation, you had even been half useful this would not have been your fate - so your score card is pretty clear!


Anonymous said...

I cannot see how it will be any different, it's clear that the same tired executives will move across. This means nothing will be transparent for fear of exposing past mistakes and rushed projects. Why is there no Strategy, no useful and upto date architecture for eHealth? why has Terminology struggled to do anything of use? Why are are the Specifications so out dated and don't even reflect the latest standards?

No one will ever know until that lot retire.

Anonymous said...

Daffy, Donald and all the other ducks have lined themselves up nicely David, it is well know the gang of three that are a sure bet to take over the new entity, it was previously posted who one might be, it won't be hard to map you the two other will be.

Anonymous said...

I guess at least it is a step in the right direction, yes there are a few things missing but there is a lot of good in this work. NEHTA loss the ability to engage a while ago and engagement of this sort is an art form. This lost capability is evident just through the use of personal emails. In this day and age, where are the forums, collaboration tools etc... Oh yeah long live Excel.

For those behind the 'doing' of this work, keep engaging and keep getting bolder and better at it.

Anonymous said...

A pure gimmic so they can say the public was engaged. Nothing will change with ACeH, just more of the same if not an even more closed shop.