Here are the results of the poll.
Should The myHR Program Have Cost So Much Money (Estimated At Close To $2.0B All Up)?
Yes - Info Tech And Skilled Staff Are Expensive 1% (3)No - It Could Have Been Done For a Lot Less 97% (205)
I Have No Idea 2% (4)
Total votes: 212
I think it would be fair to say readers reckon there has been a fair bit of waste in the myHR Program!
A really great turnout of votes!
Again, many, many thanks to all those that voted!
David.
9 comments:
David the price is less of a concern to me than the lack of value delivered, this could have delivered far more and far better. The true cost is in the fact we have a system, that as much as they try to repurpose it, and refrain the agruement for it, has no purpose and the expectations of its capabilities and semantic usefulness are misguided. We as a nation are now so constrained by this platform, that we will be limited in our options for the future. The next few years will simply result in exposing the poor quality of data, lack of understanding and conformance to standards, resulting in the inability to extract useful data, fuelling another war with GPS and specialists, who will bear the brunt of the blame and be portraid as the lazy blockers of progress.
David,
I didn't vote in the poll because it was a "have you stopped beating your wife?" type question. It assumed the MyHR should have been built in the first place.
I agree with anonymous, 8:33am and would add that a dumb records management system like MyHR is an anachronism and is most certainly not eHealth.
Medical practitioners need health data not health records - there's a huge difference, one that I doubt ADHA full understands.
Bernsard and 8:33am, agree with your statements regarding the current situation. What really concerns me apart from the flippant attempt to provide transparency is this statement take from the Feb CEO update:
Board members will remain concerned about the capabilities of the new organisation to meet the delivery challenges of the work plan this year and next - and, of course, the potential approval of the Return to Government for My Health Record. Legacy challenges remain real. The Agency has capabilities it does not need and others that it does not have. The Board will discuss management’s proposals for our organisation’s more effective delivery of its workplan in this meeting.
I question if they even know what capability they need, there is an obvious lack of depth in the majority of EGMs and CEO. Recent posts would indicate anyone with a clue is for the chop, one wonders if it was more a case of legacy knowledge into some peoples failure rates and those people covering their tracks, more than anything else.
Two questions:
1. Does it really matter to vendors and healthcare providers, (after years without government meddling) what the ADHA does?
2. Does having Australian specific standards bodies really matter when we are an international community?
The only things that matter are the waste of money, the opportunities that have been lost and total lack of logic, evidence and rationale behind anything that is happening or being proposed.
But that's only my opinion.
1. No and it never really has.
2. Get on fine without them currently, I doubt the government wants to be constrained by standards, much the same as it ignores basic principles and bends regulation when it feels fit to do so.
2. Yes it does matter on so many fronts.
It is also essential to have computer scientists to call on, I believe the internet was founded on this discipline, so it is not something to dismiss out of hand because you don't understand it.
Legacy challenges remain real, this intrigues me, perhaps the MyHR will be replaced with something that's purpose is computational data and is underpinned by a value around semantics?
Everything that HealthConnect and NEHTA Mk 1-III have done is legacy because none of it is in use. Basically there is no output from the last 15 years that is any good, but it "exists" so I guess you would call that legacy?
Post a Comment