Here are the results of the poll.
How Do You Rate Telstra Health As A Provider Of Digital Health Products And Services?
Excellent 0% (0)
OK 29% (15)
Neutral 35% (18)
Poor 29% (15)
Hopeless 4% (2)
I Have No Idea 2% (1)
Total votes: 51
A mostly neutral and equally balanced vote with many feeling Telstra Health should lift its game.
Any insights on the poll are welcome, as a comment, as usual!
A fair number of votes. but a clear outcome.
1 of 51 who answered the poll admitted to not being sure about the answer to the question!
Again, many, many thanks to all those who voted!
David.
14 comments:
Show me the numbers underpinning the Telstra Health business and I will give you a rating as you have asked. Your question is quite meaningless and irrelevant as it can only be based on superfluous unsubstantiated marketing fluff. You should know better than that to ask such a silly question without factual numbers to back it up upon which to base a reasonably informed rating. Give us the numbers please. If you don't have them say so and withdraw the question. Surely that is a reasonable position to hold.
I don't agree with you comment. I asked for a subjective user assessment nor anything else.
You could also tone down your attitude a touch I suggest.
David.
Typically bureaucrats stance.
I don't have a clue what you are on about!
David.
Re this week's poll. I have been in hospital three times in the past few months and each time I left, I was given a discharge summary.
Is this not common practice? If so, what's the problem? If patients don't take the summary to their GP, then sending it to the GP is hardly going to help - it's the patient seeing the GP (or specialist) that matters, not a bit of paper.
Ask Telstra to help.
Re: this week's poll (Hospital Discharge Summaries)
A recent study of HDS for stroke patients said..
"The findings suggest that discharge communication is often inadequate for the complex care and recovery needs of stroke survivors. The challenges in accessing care plans were noted barriers to continuity of care, while shared understandings of stroke survivors’ needs were identified as enablers. As discharge communication processes were perceived to be disconnected, primary care practitioners suggested a team approach across care settings. It is concluded that initiatives are required to increase primary care collaboration with hospital teams (which include stroke survivors and their caregivers) to improve continuity of care after stroke."
https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.13696
My experience with hospital discharge summaries & referrals to specialist is the Doctors only look at them after we're in their office or waiting to go in (you have to make an appointment & they can then charge for their time). Are there any statistics showing if this has changed because of secure messaging?
Regarding the current poll "Should hospitals work much harder to ensure Discharge Summaries arrive promptly for GPs? you need to revise your view of the world.
Computer-generated, long, cumbersome, poorly designed Discharge Summaries containing huge amounts of hospital inpatient information is of little relevance / use to GPs.
A one to two page summary of key elements of the inpatient stay is what the GP wants. When vendors' software systems can automatically generate such a summary then the Discharge Summary will become relevant to GPs. All the hospital should have to do is ensure the Discharging Medical Officer sights and signs to DS at which time it should be given to the patient and sent to the GP automatically.
This issue has nothing to do with the hospital working harder. It has to do with the software vendors ensuring their system can create a concise, meaningful, relevant Discharge Summary.
That is the problem that has to be fixed David. I hope you can agree with that view of the problem.
I am glad we have lots of discussion and have no issues with the points made.
The bottom line it to get the info to GPs as quickly as possible. Format, method and content can of course be discussed...
David.
With the utmost respect I submit that "The bottom line is" .... the effective and relative design and automatic production of the one to two page Discharge Summary prior to getting it to the GP.
I just want a system that delivers promptly (not snail-mail) and has reasonably useful content, so I think we agree.
Don't let the good be the enemy of perfection. If we can get to where you want all to the good!
The poll seems to suggest people would enjoy prompter DS delivery.
David.
Looking at the Discharge Summaries I have, there are three sections:
1. Why the admission
2. What was done
3. Recommended next steps.
The first two are relatively easy - they can be done by a nurse, potentially automatically if the hospital has an EMR, the third isn't and is probably what takes the time.
An observation. Two of the three admissions were planned and my specialists continued with the treatment so a Discharge Summary was for me, not for them - they had all the data and more.
We have 20 years of technical agreements based on clinical input and pretty well understood workflows and information behaviours, we have standards, we have specification in openEHR and HL7 as well as ISO/AS. What we have IMHO is procurement being weak in understanding how funding and contract levers incentives vendors. The governments and hospitals are to blame, they hold the investment strings. Vendors will do what is required and what they can negotiate.
What G. Carter states is certainly a black elephant. Rarely a technical issue, always a business problem. I also find truths in Anon sentiments.
Post a Comment