The NSW HealtheLink Evaluation – The Devil is in The Detail.

This is an interesting report but as usual what is said is less important than what is omitted.

The report – such as it is – is found here:

An Evaluation of the Healthelink Electronic Health Record Pilot (Summary Report) (272K)

A comment made on the announcement in many ways said it all – to paraphrase “one or two clinician evaluations is worth more than a host of accountants”!

The random points I found interesting were (given the trial period reported is from March 2006 to September 2008):

First any thought of reporting costs of the pilot was blocked by the terms of reference.

Second there was no attempt reported to make any assessment of clinical impact.

Third, despite the time allowed for adoption, only 165 of 800 clinicians had actually used the system at all in the last 90 days.

Fourth, despite 2.5 years of trialling, and compulsory enrolment, a useful critical mass of patients and information is yet to be gathered.

Fifth, it seem pretty clear that while there are claims of technology success the time allocated has not permitted development of any really useful seamless integration of Healthelink and GP client systems. Clinician access and workflow problems remain major issues.

Sixth is appears the project team have, for whatever reason, failed to get GP software providers to co-operate and successfully integrate Healthelink into their client systems.

Seventh the benefits claimed are anecdotal and not evaluated in any hard way in terms of time saving, clinical improvements, patient satisfaction or anything else I can spot.

Eighth what has been done has been rather ‘National Standards Free’ and it is suggested this should be addressed sooner rather than later.

Ninth, despite the time available for improvement, the system is functionally poor and does not yet even provide a basic patient summary for each patient. (This really should be the core of any Shared EHR in my view as it is in Denmark, Scotland etc).

Tenth 35% of patients wanted an opt-in – not opt-out consent model – hardly a number to be ignored despite the clinicians being happy with opt-out. (Amazing that 66% of patients first found out they had been enrolled when the information pack turned up in the mail and then almost ½ did not read it fully!)

The scope of the pilot involved approximately 40,000 at the end of the trial with ½ being enrolled in the last 4-5 months.

Of the records created 95% of the Maitland records and 98% of the Western Sydney records were not accessed during the trial – hardly a heavy use!

Patients ignored internet access to their record in droves – only one in 492 looking at them in Maitland and one in 1078 in Western Sydney.

Overall it really seems to me this is one of those trials which should have been conducted as a learning experiment – given the length of time it ran – to get things really working. It seems that has not really happened and that the opportunity to really find out what might works has for now been lost.

Even the report we have should force a total re-think and a much improved approach before broader implementation is planned. The recommendations for improvement in Section 6.0 of the document need to be taken very much to heart.

The final point is, of course, if this pilot was actually a success, why are we not allowed to see the whole evaluation report - and if less than that why can't the most learnings be obtained through full disclosure?

Right now we can only say ‘Healthelink and NSW Health needs to try much harder’

David.

Summary Evaluation Report of NSW HealtheLink Finally Released.

For your reading pleasure the following was pointed out today.

Evaluation

This report presents the results of an evaluation of the Healthelink electronic health record (EHR) pilot. This report was prepared by KPMG. It focuses on the implementation, functioning and performance of the Healthelink EHR pilot from the time of its commencement in March 2006 to September 2008.

An Evaluation of the Healthelink Electronic Health Record Pilot (Summary Report) (272K)

The site is located here:

http://www.healthelink.nsw.gov.au/evaluation

Bit of a pity – yet again – we have a summary report – because citizens are not grown up enough to be allowed the full truth!

Maybe some commentary a bit later.

David.

The Evidence Mounts for the Real World Value of Health IT.

Despite the nonsense that seems to be going on in the leadership of e-Health in Australia the evidence of the real world positive impact of Health IT continues to accumulate.

First this week we have:

Effect of Electronic Prescribing With Formulary Decision Support on Medication Use and Cost

Michael A. Fischer, MD, MS; Christine Vogeli, PhD; Margaret Stedman, MPH; Timothy Ferris, MD, MPH; M. Alan Brookhart, PhD; Joel S. Weissman, PhD

Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(22):2433-2439.

Background Electronic prescribing (e-prescribing) with formulary decision support (FDS) prompts prescribers to prescribe lower-cost medications and may help contain health care costs. In April 2004, 2 large Massachusetts insurers began providing an e-prescribing system with FDS to community-based practices.

Methods Using 18 months (October 1, 2003, to March 31, 2005) of administrative data, we conducted a pre-post study with concurrent controls. We first compared the change in the proportion of prescriptions for 3 formulary tiers before and after e-prescribing began, then developed multivariate longitudinal models to estimate the specific effect of e-prescribing when controlling for baseline differences between intervention and control prescribers. Potential savings were estimated using average medication costs by formulary tier.

Results More than 1.5 million patients filled 17.4 million prescriptions during the study period. Multivariate models controlling for baseline differences between prescribers and for changes over time estimated that e-prescribing corresponded to a 3.3% increase (95% confidence interval, 2.7%-4.0%) in tier 1 prescribing. The proportion of prescriptions for tiers 2 and 3 (brand-name medications) decreased correspondingly. e-Prescriptions accounted for 20% of filled prescriptions in the intervention group. Based on average costs for private insurers, we estimated that e-prescribing with FDS at this rate could result in savings of $845 000 per 100 000 patients. Higher levels of e-prescribing use would increase these savings.

Conclusions Clinicians using e-prescribing with FDS were significantly more likely to prescribe tier 1 medications, and the potential financial savings were substantial. Widespread use of e-prescribing systems with FDS could result in reduced spending on medications.

Author Affiliations: Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women's Hospital (Drs Fischer and Brookhart and Ms Stedman), and Institute for Health Policy, Massachusetts General Hospital (Drs Vogeli, Ferris, and Weissman), Harvard Medical School, Boston.

Full paper is found here if you have access.

http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/168/22/2433?etoc

There are articles also available with more details.

See here:

With e-prescribing, US doctors pick cheaper drugs

Mon Dec 8, 2008 4:00pm EST

By Will Dunham

WASHINGTON, Dec 8 (Reuters) - Doctors who put aside their paper pads and prescribe medicines electronically may be more likely to choose lower-cost drugs, saving money for patients and insurers, U.S. researchers said on Monday.

Only about 6 percent of U.S. doctors use "e-prescribing" even though doing so may improve efficiency and reduce errors such as a pharmacy misreading a doctor's sloppy handwriting or dispensing a different drug with a similar name.

Dr. Michael Fischer of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston and colleagues detailed another e-prescribing benefit: encouraging doctors to choose cheaper drugs.

The researchers evaluated a program in Massachusetts in which two large insurers worked with a maker of e-prescribing systems, Zix Corp (ZIXI.O), to get doctors to use one that employed simple color coding to identify prescription medication, whether name-brand or generic, by price level.

Insurers use a three-tiered system regarding drug costs.

In the year after adopting this e-prescribing system, the doctors increased their use of tier 1 prescriptions -- those with the lowest cost -- by 3.3 percent, while prescriptions for the more expensive drugs declined, the researchers wrote in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

That translates to a savings for consumers and insurers of $845,000 per 100,000 patients per year. In a country of 300 million people, such savings could be substantial.

"When you use an electronic prescribing system to give physicians information on which drugs are less expensive for their patients at the point of prescribing -- right when they're making that decision -- they're going to choose medications that are more affordable for their patients," Fischer said in a telephone interview.

Full report here:

http://www.reuters.com/article/americasIpoNews/idUSN0851025220081208

And here:

Electronic Prescribing Saves Patients Money

It steers doctors toward lower-cost drugs, study finds

Posted December 8, 2008

By Ed Edelson

HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, Dec. 8 (HealthDay News) -- An electronic prescribing system that tells doctors which drugs are the least expensive can save millions a year, a new study finds.

"One of the challenges physicians face is that they don't know which drugs are preferred or not preferred," said Dr. Michael A. Fischer, an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and lead author of a report in the Dec. 8/22 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine. "The insurance companies involved in the study provided that information by a color code -- green for drugs that were preferred, red for drugs that were not preferred."

Full article here:

http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/healthday/2008/12/08/electronic-prescribing-saves-patients-money.html

On a different but also important tack we have:

MDdatacor and Wellmark Release Quality Improvement Program Results

Wednesday December 10, 10:00 am ET

ATLANTA, Dec. 10 /PRNewswire/ -- MDdatacor(R), Inc. and Wellmark(R) Blue Cross and Blue Shield today released the first set of results of a quality improvement program of more than 9,000 Wellmark members living with diabetes. The dramatic results showed a significant improvement in both process and patient outcome measures.

Wellmark and MDdatacor Collaboration

The results are part of Wellmark's Collaboration on Quality(R) Incent and Reward Best Practices primary care initiative, a collaboration between Wellmark and network physicians to promote the improved quality and efficiency of health care. Wellmark contracted with MDdatacor to provide a technology platform that helps doctors identify gaps in patient care, as well as opportunities to enhance treatment for their patients, through access to clinical data.

"Providing physicians with actionable data at the point-of-care creates opportunities to enhance patient care," said Tim Roche, co-founder, president and CEO of MDdatacor. "MDdatacor has the unique ability to capture clinically-relevant information right from the physician's own patient records. Physicians find the data to be more credible because it is based on clinical data and not solely on claims data."

MDdatacor's patented and interoperable CareInformatix(TM) platform provides the most comprehensive patient information through collecting and analyzing data from all available sources in a physician practice, including electronic medical records, lab, registry and practice management systems, dictated transcriptions and claims.

Study Results Demonstrate Significant Improvement in Patient Outcomes

Using evidence-based guidelines, Wellmark's quality improvement program measured the percentage increase in diabetic patients receiving an annual HgA1C, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and blood pressure tests, as well as improved clinical outcomes as measured by lowered test scores for each of those measures.

Prior to the implementation of Wellmark's Collaboration on Quality program, only 46 percent of the 9,012 members living with diabetes were receiving an annual HgA1C test. That number increased to 90 percent at the end of the program period. This can be attributed to the fact that physicians had access to critical data about their patients, showing that they were in need of the tests.

Patient outcomes also improved notably, with the percentage of patients with an HgA1C level less than 8 rising from 37 percent to 75 percent. Controlling blood glucose levels lowers the chance of a diabetic patient having diabetes-related health problems, such as heart attack, stroke blindness, kidney failure and life-threatening infections.

Full press release here:

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/081210/ny51187.html?.v=1

Again a large real world study with a positive outcome!

It seems there a none so blind as cannot see in OZ.

David.

Finally Some Reaction to the Deloittes Strategy In the Press.

It is good to see there has now been some reaction to the release of the Deloittes National E- Health Strategy.

I have found the following so far:

1. ZD-Net Australia.

E-Health: Australia's $5bn black hole

Renai LeMay, ZDNet.com.au

15 December 2008 02:41 PM

Much more here – with some of the blog commentary:

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/E-Health-Australia-s-5bn-black-hole/0,130061733,339293816,00.htm

2. MIS Australia.

Another decade wait for e-health

Tuesday, 16 December 2008 | Ben Woodhead

Article here:

http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1229380777039&section=news&xmlSource=/news/feed.xml&title=Another+decade+wait+for+e-health

3. Australian Financial Review.

Health records fail the IT test

Tuesday, 16 December 2008 | Ben Woodhead

Article here (expensive subscription required):

http://www.afr.com/applications/Stock_mxml.html?pid=A&one=EDP://20081216000030649416

All three articles were pretty negative on what had gone on to date and did not seem all that positive about the future – to say the least.

Most also seemed to suggest that while the plan was sound without funding and political commitment there would be a long wait!

Let me know if you spot other coverage.

David.

Useful and Interesting Health IT Links from the Last Week –14/12/2008.

Huge interest in the story of yesterday – with the seeming hoax of an e-health strategy being released.

If you want to contribute to the effort of making the hopeless politicians grasp the need for e-health can I suggest you go to the site below and get in touch! All hands to the pumps is my view!

Site to contact.

The Coalition for E-Health (Australia)

http://www.ceh.net.au/

Now the news!

Again, in the last week, I have come across a few reports and news items which are worth passing on.

These include first:

Ten prophecies for the digital millennium

Graeme Philipson

December 9, 2008

A summary of the main trends in IT, from the rise of the supernet
to the threat posed by intelligent machines.

Recently I was asked to speak at a conference about what's going to happen in IT predictions in the next 10 years. It's always hard to tell the future, but here goes anyway - 10 predictions, in no particular order. I have mentioned most of these ideas in various columns during the past year or two. So treat this, my last column for the year, as sort of a summary of what I believe to be the trends in IT as we near the end of the first decade of the digital millennium.

1. The internet will become the "supernet"

The internet has been around since 1969, but it's only 15 years since it has become the web - easy to use, easy to navigate, with billions of web pages and billions of users.

We have already reached the point at which most devices connected to the internet are mobile - phones, cars, even household appliances. That trend will continue, with the move to "embedded computing", where the internet links objects as well as general-purpose computers.

The other nine are here:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/biztech/ten-prophecies-for-the-digital-millennium/2008/12/09/1228584755498.html

This is a good list and looks about right to me for the next 5-10 years. Good to see more e-health gets a run in the list!

Second we have:

Mobile e-health van trial

PM - Monday, 8 December , 2008 18:42:00

Reporter: Donna Field

MARK COLVIN: A new medical program in Queensland is using state of the art technology to treat children living in remote Indigenous communities.

A mobile health clinic will tour the communities capturing patient images. It will then relay that information to specialists in Brisbane.

The trial of the mobile telemedicine program is the first in Australia. Health professionals hope that it will reduce preventable conditions like ear infections.

Donna Field reports.

DONNA FIELD: Cherbourg in south-east Queensland is the third largest Indigenous community in the State - home to about 1200 people.

It will also house a new van that will be hard to miss. The mobile e-health van has been painted brightly by a local artist and on board is specialised medical equipment.

Dr Anthony Smith from the University of Queensland's Centre for Online Health came up with the idea.

ANTHONY SMITH: It will improve screening rates because what we're doing is providing screening in a much more systematic fashion. Instead of doing screening once or twice a year by sending specialist groups out to schools and communities, what we're doing is providing a facility which will be present every day throughout the year so that children will be able to access the service through the schools. They'll be screened systematically. We aim to screen 90 per cent of children every year.

More here:

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2440968.htm

This certainly seems like very good news – given the toll on education and quality of life ear disease causes in these communities.

Third we have:

Software vendors get visibility of e-health

8 November, 2008. Healthcare software vendors will be able to view the messaging protocols for a nationwide e-health environment, following the publication of a suite of technical specifications today.

The National E-Health Transition Authority (NEHTA) has published specifications for both messaging and connectivity architecture which underpin the approach to e-health communications for NEHTA’s ePathology, eDischarge Summary, eReferral and eMedications Management.

“The specifications define the technical protocols by which messages will be transported and secured and the means by which parties will identify, locate and connect to each other," said Chief Executive Peter Fleming.

The specifications relate to those aspects of e-health communication which will apply in a common way across all of NEHTA’s packages.

They are accompanied by a range of supporting material, including example implementations and implementation guides, which are designed to assist organisations seeking to adopt and apply the specifications.

“The specifications have been the culmination of several years of effort by NEHTA to develop an approach to e-health communication that is interoperable, secure, open, robust, reliable, and adaptable to future needs," Mr Fleming said.

More (including links to material) here:

http://www.nehta.gov.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=386&Itemid=144

This is actually pretty important stuff. I really wonder why they got the date wrong (it was released December 8) and is clearly out of order on the NEHTA web site.

One thing about this documentation I do find astonishing is that it would seem to be the outcome of almost 2 years work. I am at a loss to understand why it would have taken so long. In the meantime, of course, people have moved forward with messaging all over the country. I hope not too much of this effort is invalidated by what has now been released. I would be interested in comments from those at the ‘bleeding edge’ about how useful this all is.

Fourth we have:

PC marks 40th birthday

December 9, 2008 - 10:54AM

Little did the world realise 40 years ago that a San Francisco stage was featuring the first public glimpse of an invention that would revolutionise not only our daily lives but also our ability to solve the world's problems.

An audience of about 1000 people had witnessed the premiere of the personal computer.

The December 9, 1968, unveiling of the primitive device with a mouse and interactive screen - in a now-legendary demonstration by its inventor, Douglas Engelbart of the Stanford Research Institute - drew a rousing, standing ovation from the computing cognoscenti who recognised the significance of what they had just seen.

The machine raised hopes of solving a major modern quandary - how to navigate the world's rapidly accumulating and increasingly complex store of information. That year's fledgling efforts to navigate the physical universe in spaceships seemed ponderous and slow compared to the prospect of speeding through the universe of information in the digital ships promised by the new computers.

The invention featured rudimentary windows and hyperlinks that allowed jumping from one document to another, as well as the ability to edit text and add graphics on a video monitor. The presentation also offered a peek at future computer networks that would become the internet.

"No one has ever before or since seen such a collection of great ideas in one demonstration," said SRI President and CEO Curt Carlson.

The event - dubbed "the mother of all demos" by chroniclers of the computer industry and Silicon Valley - was being commemorated on its 40th anniversary in a program at Stanford University. The event included Engelbart and some of the other pioneers who worked with him.

The 1968 demonstration was years before anyone dreamed of Microsoft or Apple. "Bill Gates was 12 at the time; Steve Jobs was 13," writes John Naughton in his book A Brief History of the Future.

Though Engelbart may have not achieved the fame of a Gates or Jobs, his profound influence is widely acknowledged in the field.

Engelbart is "the Moses of computers," writes Steven Levy in his history of the Macintosh.

More here:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/gadgets/laptops--desktops/pc-marks-40th-birthday/2008/12/09/1228584794750.html

This is just a fascinating report as I had no idea the PC went so far back – as they say you learn something new every day!

Fifth we have:

Industry baffled over clean-feed internet pilot

Filtering the net akin to boiling the ocean: Telstra

Darren Pauli 12/12/2008 15:43:00

Internet Service Providers (ISPs) participating in live trials of the national Internet content filtering scheme say the tests will be undermined by a government decision to test the “clean-feed” blacklist under watered-down conditions.

The voluntary trials will test the efficiency of ISP-level Internet content filtering which, if successful, will be implemented across all Australian Web connections at an estimated cost of $70 million. The initiative, part of the government's $125.8 million cyber safety plan to reduce child pornography, will block nefarious and illegal content listed in a separate clean-feed and opt-out blacklist, operated by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).

Blacklists will be immune from public scrutiny under an ACMA exemption to the Freedom of Information Act as disclosure of the banned Web sites would allow paedophiles to avoid detection and would hinder law enforcement efforts. The addition of new content categories to the blacklists requires parliamentary approval.

The plan has come under intense fire from industry experts and privacy lobby groups that argue ISP-level filtering will choke Internet speeds and encourage censorship abuse.

Many participating telcos, which include Optus, Internode, and iiNet, have told Computerworld they do not agree with the scheme and expect the trials to return unacceptable results.

Telstra, the nation's largest telco, has refused to participate in the voluntary trials. Chief operations officer Greg Winn, responding to questions at a Sydney media lunch, said the scheme is a no-win for government and industry.

“It is like trying to boil the ocean,” Winn said.

“It is my personal opinion, but there is just no win for anyone in this.”

The telco has said it will implement its own content filters if the plan is mandated.

More here:

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/270791/industry_baffled_over_clean-feed_internet_pilot?eid=-6787

This issue really seems to be hotting up – what with Telstra playing hard ball and the Get-Up campaign now in full swing. I think Minister Conroy is likely to find the compulsory nature of the plan may just be a bridge to far. This will be an issue to follow closely next year – given e-Health’s need for optimal internet infrastructure.

Last we have the slightly more technical note.

Review: Firefox 3.1 Beta 2 adds speed and privacy

Mozilla's new beta adds private browsing and other nifty features

Preston Gralla 12/12/2008 12:48:00

Firefox 3.1 may only be a point release -- from 3.0 to 3.1 -- but its just-released Beta 2 version is a good indication that the final release will be a must-have upgrade for anyone using Firefox.

Beta 2 (now available from Mozilla) unveils the browser's most important new feature -- Private Browsing, which automatically deletes all traces of a browsing session. In addition, the new beta turns on a feature designed to make the browser up to 40 times faster (at least, according to Mozilla).

Browsing in private

The most important new feature in Beta 2 is the addition of Private Browsing -- the same feature that is called Incognito Mode in Chrome and InPrivate Browsing in Internet Explorer 8. All traces of your browsing session are deleted when you use Private Browsing -- your browsing history, temporary Internet files, search history, download history, Web form history and cookies. (For obvious reasons, it's popularly known as "porn mode.")

Much more here:

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/270772/review_firefox_3_1_beta_2_adds_speed_privacy?eid=-6787

I agree with the review having been using it for a few days – fast, stable etc. As Preston says the final release will be a must have!

For the supporters of Linux – we also have a major release:

Fedora turns 10

Red Hat's open source standard bearer and mineshaft canary is still everything to every Linux power user

Paul Venezia (InfoWorld) 09/12/2008 08:29:00

There comes a point in the life of any hard-core Linux user when the idea of digging about to find yet another obscure piece of software, compiling the code, and integrating it into your daily routine just seems annoying, not compelling. This is where Fedora comes through. Because more of the popular and necessary packages "just work" with Fedora, less time is burned spinning wheels and more time is available for productive tasks.

To those who grew up with Red Hat Linux, the birth of Fedora was a bit of a surprise. In 2003, Fedora rose from the ashes of Red Hat Linux when Red Hat commercialized its Linux offering under the now-familiar name of Red Hat Enterprise Linux and made Fedora its open source initiative. As it played out, Fedora was, and is, essentially the beta release of Red Hat Enterprise Server. When a Fedora distribution has been released and used the world over for a significant period of time, it forks to become the next iteration of RHEL. Thus, Fedora has always been a community-supported preview of the next version of RHEL.

Full article here:

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/270173/fedora_turns_10?eid=-255

More next week.

David.

The Amazing Effect of Media Management!

I thought I would see what coverage of the late Friday afternoon release of the summary of the Deloittes National E-Health Strategy.

I have checked out web sites from The SMH, The Age, Fin Review as well as Computerworld and ZDNet.

Not a whisper so far! (1.00 pm 15 Dec, 2008). Release was on Friday 12 Dec in the afternoon.

Just amazing and show how well the late Friday night hides information – especially close to Christmas!

I would love to hear when people spot some mainstream media coverage.

David.

Australia’s National E-Health Strategy – An Obvious and Disappointing Hoax.

OK, I have now had 24 hours to consider how to respond to the document released by the Australian Health Ministers Advisory Council (AHMAC).

The report is available for download here:

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/National+Ehealth+Strategy

In a few words I am ‘shocked and amazed’ at what has just happened.

AHMAC, for reasons it chooses not to publicly explain, has released about 20 pages of the 120 page document which was developed by Deloittes. ( As expected the summary report was released Friday afternoon close to Christmas to minimise any negative reaction!)

There are some very good principles to be found among the pages we have been given but sadly, without significant funding, it can and will go absolutely nowhere and its development has been a total waste of time.

These good things include focus on applications and messaging, standards, conformance and certification, governance, and incremental staged approach and getting basic infrastructure in place.

Sadly all this will cost some money to plan and implement – and there is neither funding, organisational will or organisational responsibility for moving the strategy forward identified

Actually, what was released is a classic case of bureaucratic ‘box ticking’. A country has to have a published National E-Health Strategy – so now we have one. Sad it is a total unfunded fraud on all those who have been waiting for some sign of change over the last 4 years since the bureaucrats last decided they would not invest in Health IT (When HealthConnect morphed from a real project into a “change management strategy”). Frankly I don’t think the box has been ticked if you don’t ensure action after planning.

What is worse still it is the same DoHA leadership people who did the blocking of funding act last time.

See here for the time line of that seven or so year saga:

http://aushealthit.blogspot.com/2007/12/abject-failure-of-howard-government-in.html

It was July 2005 this happened and 3.5 years later we are very little further ahead.

I find it just astonishing that the Australian Health System cannot find the capability to invest 0.5% of its expenditure in technology that, in time, will allow it to become safer, more efficient and more sustainable. Sure I know times are tough – but they are going to become a great deal tougher and more difficult if this is not done – as every other advanced economy recognises.

While not perfect, the full Deloittes plan was a very good, sensibly costed roadmap of a pragmatic way forward which, if adopted, would have made a real difference. It would also have required some investment which it seems is simply not available for no sane reason.

This is so short-sighted it is just awful. As the title says it is a hoax on all those who actually care for our health system!

I wonder is there any chance there might be some funds in the up-coming Budget – due in May, 2009. We can only hope the $60M or so spent in “Program 10.2 e-Health Implementation” can be some core start-up funding to get something going. (That plus some of the apparent NEHTA underspend might make a vaguely useful, but very small, bucket!)

See here for 2008/09 budget details.

http://aushealthit.blogspot.com/2008/05/federal-budget-for-2008-9-e-health-cut.html

News tomorrow!

David.

Australian National E- Health Strategy Released.

The following has just appeared.

National Ehealth Strategy

In early 2008, Australian Health Ministers, through the Australian Health Ministers' Advisory Council, commissioned Deloitte to develop a strategic framework and plan to guide national coordination and collaboration in E-Health. As part of this process, Deloitte conducted a series of national consultations which included Commonwealth, State and Territory Governments, general practitioners, medical specialists, nursing and allied health, pathology, radiology and pharmacy sectors, health information specialists, health service managers, researchers, academics and consumers.

The National E-Health Strategy developed by Deloitte, together with key stakeholders, provides a useful guide to the further development of E-Health in Australia. It adopts an incremental and staged approach to developing E-Health capabilities to:

• leverage what currently exists in the Australian E-Health landscape;
• manage the underlying variation in capacity across the health sector and States and Territories; and
• allow scope for change as lessons are learned and technology is developed further.

The Strategy reinforces the existing collaboration of Commonwealth, State and Territory Governments on the core foundations of a national E-Health system, and identifies priority areas where this can be progressively extended to support health reform in Australia. It also provides sufficient flexibility for individual States and Territories, and the public and private health sectors, to determine how they go about E-Health implementation within a common framework and set of priorities to maximise benefits and efficiencies.

A Summary of National E-Health Strategy can be accessed by clicking here (PDF 246 KB).

The page is found here:

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/National+Ehealth+Strategy

Commentary later.

Enjoy!

David.