This popped up late last week:
Health Bulletin 15 December 2020
Australia December 15 2020
……
Russell Kennedy Principal to Chair new Advisory Group to explore patient information sharing amongst hospitals
The Victorian Government has appointed a Health Information Sharing Legislation Advisory Group, chaired by Russell Kennedy Principal Michael Gorton AM to explore information sharing amongst public hospitals in Victoria.
It is a key consideration of the Advisory Group that any proposal it puts forward does not replicate the national My Health Record. The Advisory Group will consider privacy and consent matters, and measures that can be put in place to prevent improper use and access to personal and sensitive health information.
The intent of the Advisory Group is to enable public hospitals to safely and securely share electronic patient records, in close to real time. This means that in emergency situations, full patient records can be made available to treating practitioners, at the point of care. Such regimes are already in place in other Australian states.
The Advisory Group intends to make recommendations for legislation in 2021.
Here is the link:
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=a5a05493-ef96-46fb-aa4d-fff30f09d04d
The third paragraph is key were the #myHealthRecord is not at all seen as a model to be replicated and there is a desire for a close to real-time system at takes into account consent and privacy issues. This sounds like something within which the #myHealthRecord would have no place!
They say that “Such regimes are already in place in other Australian states.” Which ones do readers think they are thinking of?
David.
4 comments:
David,
Thank you for your continuing work shining the light of reason and experience on a subject (digital health) that is, IMHO, infected with far too much exaggeration and self serving claims.
I wish you and your readers a safe and happy Christmas and New Year.
Bernard
Fundamental starting point is to answer the questions:
1. "Which Australian States have such a regime (system) in place,
2. for how long,
3. how does it 'work,
4. how effective is it?
Contrary to what had been assumed or misread earlier, this statement makes it 100% clear that what is to be explored is "information sharing amongst public hospitals in Victoria".
That will not include records made or kept in any other setting.
There is a kind of egocentricity that operates in health care and in reporting about health care, which assumes that health care is provided only in public hospitals or that the only health care that matters is provided in public hospitals. This egocentricity is what leads to incorrect reports such as "all health care records of Victorians are to be kept in the proposed Clinical Information Sharing system".
Hi Oliver - and Happy Christmas!
I have to say re-reading what I have seen reported the exact scope that is intended is rather vague - given the public hospitals have a multitude of OP clinics that deliver a lot of secondary and tertiary care which clearly is documented there along with some primary care functions in areas like mental health. Also the private / public line can be a bit blurred on occasion.
My feeling is we may need to wait to see just what proposal emerges but that at first reading it is a pretty large and complex undertaking with many issues and difficulties!
Happy Christmas to all.
David
Post a Comment