A Gap That Really Needs to be Filled (and Can Be Easily) here in Australia.

The following appeared a few days ago.

Drug safety watchdog to be replaced with new body

Julie-Anne Davies | December 06, 2008

Article from: The Australian

THE drug safety watchdog is to be abolished and a new committee with broader powers established in its place, under reforms planned by the Rudd Government.

The Weekend Australian has learned the Adverse Drug Reactions Advisory Committee will be replaced by a Medicines Safety Committee as part of an overhaul of the nation's drug safety system.

It is understood the Rudd Government will introduce a more vigilant drug safety regime that will include rigorous surveillance of prescription drugs after they have received approval to be sold in Australia.

A spokeswoman for the Therapeutic Goods Administration, which oversees drug safety in Australia, confirmed there were a "number of enhancements proposed to the pharmacovigilance framework for prescription medicines".

These will include the introduction of drug audits and the appointment of a drug monitor to oversee the safety of specific drugs.

The new drug safety committee will be given extra powers to oversee, assess and review risk-management plans of drug companies for approved medicines.

A more flexible protocol that will allow drugs to be suspended rather than withdrawn or recalled when safety issues arise is also expected to be in the legislative reform package slated to be introduced into federal parliament early next year.

The Weekend Australian earlier this year revealed chronic under-reporting by doctors and hospitals of serious adverse reactions to drugs could be creating a false picture of which medications pose a health threat.

Of the estimated 500,000 cases a year nationally of people becoming sick because of a drug they are taking, GPs report less than 2 per cent to the TGA.

More here:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24758470-23289,00.html

All I can say is amen to that and to point out that if ever there was an area where e-Health and Data Mining can help this is it.

Medicare has access to huge amounts of medicines and clinical outcome information that could be mined – with the right controls – to make a huge difference. I hope discussion of doing something like this is on the top of the agenda of the new National E-Health Management body.

David.

Secrecy Gone Feral! – Why Can’t the Public Access the Information and Advice they have Paid For?

I must be from a very old school, or totally naive, but I really believe that when reports are commissioned by Governments on matters that don’t affect national security and such like matters the openness and transparency is a good thing and that Government secrecy is a really bad thing.

In the present context it is good to see the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission actually releasing discussion papers and submissions. It is also amazing that some submissions should be confidential – surely anonymous as the author is good enough – but not so for reasons I can’t even begin to guess at.

As a result of the release of the most recent paper on e-Health the issue has again raised its ugly head.

This paper is found here:

E-Health - Enabler for Australia's Health Reform, Booz & Company, November 2008.pdf (PDF 1082 KB)

As I browsed I noticed the following reports – which to the best of my knowledge are not in the public domain.

1. Allen Consulting Group, “Economic impacts of a national Individual Electronic Health Records system”, July 2008.

2. NEHTA, “A National IEHR Service Business Case”, COAG 2008

3. KPMG, “Cost Benefit Analysis of Shared Electronic Health records”, NEHTA, September 2007

These need to be added to the following:

The matters discussed here:

http://aushealthit.blogspot.com/2008/09/nehta-and-openness-just-what-is-problem.html

and here:

http://aushealthit.blogspot.com/2008/06/just-why-are-nehtas-plans-for-shared.html

There are, of course, a legion of consulting reports and modelling developed for NEHTA which have never seen the light of day and probably never will – and I know because I wrote parts of some of them!

We are also yet to see the detailed of the evaluation of the Eastern Goldfields Reference Project which was submitted in June, 2006 to DoHA. Of course none of the earlier HealthConnect evaluations ever saw the full light of day as well – so no lessons have been learned except by the bureaucrats who received these reports and who for the most part have now moved on. It really is just hopeless.

Of course state Governments are as bad. Anyone seen this one?

NSW Department of Health, Healthelink EHR Evaluation (KPMG), May 2008.

Of course not.

Until this all changes – with the best will in the world – we will continue to stumble around repeating mistakes and making a general mess of things!

Access to the information in these reports is vital both to ensure investment proposals receive the appropriate amount of scrutiny at both a business and technical level and that mistakes made and ideas not included in analysis can be given due consideration.

DoHA and the new NEHTA CEO could make a difference by responding to these suggestions.

I really hope this may change – but I am not holding my breath!

David.

Useful and Interesting Health IT Links from the Last Week – 07/12/2008

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

These include first:

E-health privacy threat for small towns

Elizabeth McIntosh - Friday, 28 November 2008

THE federal government’s plans to roll out patient e-health records could cause serious problems for those in small communities if strict privacy protocols are not in place, the Consumers’ Health Forum has warned.

In a submission to the National E-Health Transition Authority (NEHTA), the forum raised questions around the levels of access health professionals would have to patient records.

In particular, it expressed concern that if health professionals were given unfettered access to health records containing highly sensitive information, patients in small towns with specific conditions may find themselves stigmatised.

“If more people know information, or people have access to irrelevant information, it could lead to leaks and in a small town, that leaked information could have an awful impact,” the submission stated.

More here:

http://www.medicalobserver.com.au/medical-observer/news/Article.aspx/E-health-privacy-threat-for-small-towns

I find this an interesting perspective that has not been widely aired. In small communities there is no doubt very great care will need to be taken with information relating to diseases that may stigmatise people.

Second we have:

Hospital data 'rorts' face audit

• Julia Medew
• December 4, 2008

CLAIMS of "virtual wards" and data manipulation in Victorian hospitals to meet Government targets for bonus payments are being investigated by the Auditor-General.

A spokeswoman for Des Pearson yesterday confirmed the audit of hospital performance data despite Health Minister Daniel Andrews' insistence that there is no evidence to warrant an inquiry.

The investigation comes six months after the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine said overcrowded hospitals were changing patient data, admitting patients to fictitious wards and inconsistently measuring waiting times to qualify for bonus payments.

A survey of 19 emergency department directors by the college found almost 40 per cent of their hospitals had "admitted" patients when they were still in waiting rooms, corridors or on trolleys.

The doctors said the "virtual wards" were used purely for "creative accounting" to receive funding and avoid "performance watch".

More here:

http://www.theage.com.au/national/hospital-data-rorts-face-audit-20081203-6qo0.html

First we have NSW bureaucrats faking ED information and now we find Victoria up to the same tricks. The auditors nationwide need to really now conduct a comprehensive review of Health System data quality and reliability – especially as the Health Minister is planning to make so much more use of performance data.

Third we have:

Sydney hospitals switch TVs for MFDs

Liam Tung, ZDNet.com.au

03 December 2008 09:32 AM

Days after NSW's Health's technology was slammed as archaic, the Sydney West Area Health Service has gone to market for over 2,000 high-capacity bedside touch-screen computers for patient entertainment and clinician access to core health systems.

The proposed bedside "multifunctional devices" which Sydney West Area Health Service (SWAHS) released request for tender documents yesterday, are planned to be powered by 40 gigabyte hard drives, with 1Ghz Intel CPUs, and garnished with a 17 inch touch-screen.

SWAHS has asked for the units to be supplied with infrared keyboards, a web camera for video conferencing, and a magnetic swipe card reader and biometric scanner for secure access.

.....

Auburn's 185 hospital beds are the first planned to be equipped with the devices, followed by 400 beds at Blacktown Hospital, 116 at Blue Mountains District Anzac Memorial Hospital, 40 at Lithgow, 180 at Mt Druitt, 480 at Nepean, 32 at Springwood and 900 Westmead — in total, 2333 devices.

Tender responses are due by Wednesday 17 December.

More here:

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/hardware/soa/Sydney-hospitals-switch-TVs-for-MFDs/0,130061702,339293601,00.htm

This is an interesting tender and show some forward thinking about the need to provide a more interesting environment for patient’s stuck in bed as well as for clinicians to access core clinical systems.

I must say, however, that the devices seem rather underpowered, and I wonder why the tender was not State-wide to help reduce costs.

Fourth we have:

Microsoft change hits aged care

Karen Dearne | December 02, 2008

MICROSOFT Australia has accused aged-care services providers of illegitimately buying software through a discount licensing program.

Aged-care providers were shocked in October by the software giant's decision to revoke their not-for-profit status and charge full commercial rates for using Microsoft's Office, Sharepoint and SQL Server products.

The move will hike annual licensing fees by about 400 per cent. Despite representations from the Aged Care Industry IT Council, Microsoft has not changed its mind.

An independent review by Connecting Up Australia found that a number of customers across a range of industries had been illegitimately buying software through a discounted licence program, called Academic Open, for which they did not qualify, a Microsoft spokeswoman said.

Most customers were unaware they were buying an illegitimate licence, but a small number were deliberately abusing the system to access discounted software.

In the past, customers and partners had self-qualified their use of this licence, with no independent vetting.

Microsoft said lack of oversight had contributed to the issue of licence misuse and isolated cases of abuse.

The Aged Care IT Council estimated full licences for installed software would cost the industry $70 million over the next 18 months, swallowing half of the sector's annual technology budget at a time when it was being urged to improve uptake of technology systems.

.....

Federal Minister for Ageing Justine Elliot and federal Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner both said they were monitoring the issue.

Ms Elliot has launched a free, plain-English guide, called the Aged Care IT Implementation Kit, developed at a cost of $212,000 to promote the use of technology to reduce administrative burdens.

.....

More here:

http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,24734620-15306,00.html

Two points

First, aged care providers do have options (especially Open Source options) to reduce the cost of software.

Second the guide developed by the Department is quite a worthwhile document for all those starting up the technology curve. It can be found here:

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/7C8F0E64280BF568CA2574AC00183992/$File/ITAC%20Guide.pdf

Fifth we have:

iSOFT signs $14 million pharmacy contract with WA Department of Health

02 Dec 2008

Sydney – 1 December 2008 – IBA Health Group Limited (ASX: IBA) – Australia's largest listed specialist health information technology company, today announced that its iSOFT Health division has signed a contract with the Western Australian Department of Health (WA Health) for a pharmacy management solution and support services in a deal worth up to $14 million.

In up to a ten year contract, which includes license revenue and support, the centrally-managed solution from iSOFT will streamline pharmacy services at 21 public hospitals across Western Australia. The iPharmacy solution will provide consistency in managing medications and offers clinical decision support to assist with the prevention of medication errors at the point of dispensing.

i.Pharmacy will assist WA Health in implementing a series of pharmaceutical reforms, including on-line PBS processing. i.Pharmacy is already installed at 250 sites throughout Australia making iSOFT the country’s market-leader in hospital pharmacy systems.

Gary Cohen, Executive Chairman & CEO of the IBA Health Group, said: “WA Health is one of iSOFT’s major customers in Australia. We are pleased WA Health has chosen our hospital pharmacy and medication management solution to improve pharmacy, clinician and medication management in the state’s hospitals. The selection of i.Pharmacy by WA Health follows on the heels of the recent wins in South Australia and Tasmania and demonstrates that iSOFT meets the needs of collaborating health professionals operating in an integrated healthcare environment across Australia.”

More here:

http://www.ibahealth.com/html/isoft_signs_14_million_pharmacy_contract_with_wa_department_of_health.cfm

This is good to see as it means there is a process of upgrading the clinical software infrastructure of WA public hospitals actually really underway. Not before time after various problems and changes of senior management. (Usual disclaimer that I have a few IBA shares)

Last we have the slightly more technical article for the week:

Would InternetWatch Actually WORK?

By Geordie Guy

Network engineer Geordie Guy explains the technical limitations of the Government's clean feed proposal

The Australian Government's plans to introduce mandatory ISP filtering have caused something of a media frenzy.

Most of the debate has been conducted on either side of an imaginary line between advocates of free speech and critics of censorship on the one side, and organisations which seek to protect children and adults from indecency and harm on the other. This debate has at times descended into a shouting match over statistics and objectives, confusing Australians who are unsure how they feel about the issue.

Supporters argue that the clean feed proposal would merely bring the internet into line with existing regulation on traditional media such as print publications, television and radio. Meanwhile, opposition to the plan is based on a number of concerns, and of these, possibly the most confusing for many people is the claim that the filter simply won't work.

So what are the technical problems that the opponents are claiming? Are they necessarily deal breakers which make the filtering plan unworkable, or are these arguments just what filter supporters claim they are: an excuse to try and maintain the free availability of pornography?

Nobody knows precisely what screening method would be used if the filter were to go ahead. The Government trials considered several commercial products, referred to by code names, and each of them could use any one of several methods, or a set of the available methods in combination.

Much more here:

http://newmatilda.com/2008/12/04/would-internetwatch-actually-work

I found this a clear, lucid, technical explanation of why Minister Conroy is dead wrong on this internet filtering nonsense. It would do more harm than it is worth. We would be better off insisting parents take an active interest in what their young ones are doing on the Internet (and elsewhere)!

More next week.

David.

Vital Links Regarding New E-Health Plans.

There are two vital links that follow from the Australian Story.

1. Communiqué from Health Ministers Meeting (December 5, 2008)

See:

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/mr-yr08-dept-dept051208.htm

2. Booze and Co E- Health Report.

See:

http://www.nhhrc.org.au/internet/nhhrc/publishing.nsf/Content/discussion-papers

Direct link:

http://www.nhhrc.org.au/internet/nhhrc/publishing.nsf/Content/16F7A93D8F578DB4CA2574D7001830E9/$File/E-Health%20-%20Enabler%20for%20Australia%27s%20Health%20Reform,%20Booz%20&%20Company,%20November%202008.pdf

Happy reading!

David.

Good News – Seems There Was Major Progress!

Sounds good at first blush – the devil will be in the detail!

Health ministers agree to share patient e-records

Siobhain Ryan | December 06, 2008

Article from: The Australian

HEALTH ministers have finally agreed on a national plan to share patients' electronic records, on the same day a new study slammed scattergun spending of almost $1.3 billion on state-based e-health schemes.

At a meeting in Brisbane yesterday, they gave the tick to the strategy commissioned in April amid controversy over delays, cost blowouts and resignations in e-health projects and bodies across the country.

Electronic records for patients are currently held separately, if at all, across GP surgeries, hospitals, government agencies and other health centres, allowing only patchy sharing of information.

The gaps have resulted in duplicate consultations, tests and treatments and prescribing mistakes, with past studies calculating the net benefits of better electronic record-keeping at up to $8.7 billion over the first 10 years.

More here:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24758462-23289,00.html

David.

Nope!

Well, I have just checked around and can find nothing about e-health out of the Health Ministers get together today.

All sorts of stuff about more operations (really good!) and so on but nothing else I can find. (10.30pm 5 December, 2008)

Please send a web link if you have, or know of, better news!

David.

Health and Hospitals Fund – Announcement Details.

As this is now important I thought what it known of its purpose, so far, would be useful.

Here is the announcement release:

Investing In A Health System For The Future

13 May 2008

The Australian Government will establish a $10 billion Health and Hospitals Fund to support strategic investments in health as part of the Government’s reform agenda to equip Australia’s health and hospital system for the future.

The Health and Hospitals Fund will be the single biggest investment in health infrastructure ever made by an Australian Government.

The Health and Hospitals Fund will support future health infrastructure priorities, including investments in:

• health and hospital facilities and equipment as part of the Government’s health reform agenda;
• medical technology and equipment;
• major medical research facilities and equipment, including projects and facilities which will support better links between hospital-based clinical research and high quality clinical practice.

The Government will invest $10 billion in the Health and Hospitals Fund, drawn from the 2007-08 and 2008-09 surpluses. A proportion of future surpluses may be allocated to the Fund as appropriate.

Expenditure from the Health and Hospitals Fund will be subject to consideration through the Budget process each year.

The establishment of the Health and Hospitals Fund means the Government will not proceed with the establishment of the previous Government’s Health and Medical Infrastructure Fund.

In addition to our other commitments to health and hospitals, including an additional $1 billion for hospitals this year; up to $600 million to clear elective surgery waiting lists; $780 million for dental health; and $275 million for GP Super Clinics, the establishment of the Health and Hospitals Fund demonstrates the Government’s commitment, in partnership with State and Territory Governments, to equipping Australia’s health and hospital system for the future.

The Health and Hospitals Fund will be established by 1 January 2009.

The announcement is found here

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/ministers/publishing.nsf/Content/mr-yr08-nr-nr078.htm

Mr Bill Ferris AC has been appointed as Chair of the new Health and Hospitals Fund Advisory Board.

We will have to see if “medical technology and equipment” covers e-health!

David.

Last Chance Saloon for E-Health in Australia for 2008 Tomorrow!

The ABC News has just confirmed Australian Health Ministers are meeting tomorrow.

This means we will soon know if e-Health gets a serious boost in 2008 or we have to wait till who knows when to see some action.

It seems very unlikely, with the silly season upon us, we will see much happen after this meeting for the year.

As they say! – Stay Tuned!

David.