Quote Of The Year

Timeless Quotes - Sadly The Late Paul Shetler - "Its not Your Health Record it's a Government Record Of Your Health Information"

or

H. L. Mencken - "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

Friday, November 14, 2014

This May Not Be Good News For The ePAS Implementation In South Australia.

This appeared a little while ago. To point out the obvious it is this company responsible for the ePAS in S.A.

Allscripts posts $25.8M loss in Q3

Posted on Nov 07, 2014
By Mike Miliard, Managing Editor
Allscripts stock tumbled late Thursday as the company announced a $25.8 million net loss for the third quarter, but CEO Paul M. Black insisted the electronic health record developer "continued to show progress," citing new clients here and abroad.
Moreover, that net loss was much preferable to the $48.9 million loss posted for the same quarter in 2013.
Allscripts' bookings were $223 million in Q3, compared with $236 million in the third quarter of 2013 and $234 million in the second quarter of 2014.
Still, Allscripts made the case that it's continuing to rebound from its annus horribilis of 2012. For the first nine months of 2014, bookings totaled $680 million – an increase of approximately 8 percent over the first nine months of 2013.
New sales of the Sunrise EHR platform in the U.S. and the U.K. helped bookings performance in Q3, according to Allscripts, as the company saw growth in ambulatory bookings, on both a year-over-year and quarter-over-quarter basis.
"Allscripts third quarter results continued to show progress," said Paul M. Black, President and CEO of Allscripts, in a press statement.
There is a great deal more here which shows a lot about the range and scope of the business.
Would be better if they were making some money!
David.

It Is Very Hard To Implement National E-Health Systems. Here Are Some Of The Reasons!

Spotted this a little while ago.

Rethinking resistance to ‘big IT’: a sociological study of why and when healthcare staff do not use nationally mandated information and communication technologies

Authors: Greenhalgh T, Swinglehurst D, Stones R.
Journal: Health Services and Delivery Research Volume: 2 Issue: 39
Publication date: November 2014
DOI: 10.3310/hsdr02390
Citation:  Greenhalgh T, Swinglehurst D, Stones R. Rethinking resistance to ‘big IT’: a sociological study of why and when healthcare staff do not use nationally mandated information and communication technologies. Health Serv Deliv Res 2014;2(39)

Abstract

Background

Nationally mandated information and communication technology (ICT) systems are often locally resented and little used. This problem is sometimes framed in behaviourist terms, depicting the intended user of technology as a rational actor whose resistance stems from Luddism and/or ignorance, and viewing solutions in terms of training, incentives and sanctions. The implication is that if we get the ‘rewards’ and ‘punishments’ right, people will use technologies. Previous research in the social sciences, notably sociotechnical systems theory, actor–network theory and normalisation process theory, have considered the human, social and organisational context of technology use (and non-use). However, these have all had limitations in explaining the particular phenomenon of resistance to nationally mandated ICT systems.

Objective

To develop a sociologically informed theory of resistance to nationally mandated ICT systems.

Theoretical approach

We drew on Anthony Giddens’ notion of expert systems (comprising bureaucratic rules and classification systems delivered through technology) as well as theories of professional roles and ethical practice. A defining characteristic of expert systems is that they can produce ‘action at a distance’, allowing managerial control to be exerted over local practice. To the extent that people use them as intended, these systems invariably ‘empty out’ social situations by imposing rules and categories that are insensitive to local contingencies or the unfolding detail of social situations.

Study design and setting

Secondary analysis of data from case studies of three nationally mandated ICT systems in the English NHS, collected over the period 2007–10.

Results

Our analysis focused mainly on the Choose and Book system for outpatient referrals, introduced in 2004, which remained unpopular and little used throughout the period of our research (i.e. 2007–13). We identified four foci of resistance: to the policy of choice that Choose and Book symbolised and purported to deliver; to accommodating the technology’s sociomaterial constraints; to interference with doctors’ contextual judgements; and to adjusting to the altered social relations consequent on its use. More generally, use of the mandated system tended to constrain practice towards a focus on (the efficiency of) means rather than (the moral value of) ends. A similar pattern of complex sociological reasons for resistance was also seen in the other two technologies studied (electronic templates for chronic disease management and the Summary Care Record), though important differences surfaced and were explained in terms of the policy inscribed in the technology and its material features.

Conclusion

‘Resistance’ is a complex phenomenon with sociomaterial and normative components; it is unlikely to be overcome using a theoretical behaviourist techniques. To guide the study of resistance to ICT systems in health care, we offer a new theoretical and empirical approach, based around a set of questions about the policy that the technology is intended to support; the technology’s material properties; the balance between (bureaucratic) means and (professional) ends; and the implications for social roles, relationship and interactions.
We suggest avenues for future research, including methodology (e.g. extending the scope and scale of ethnographic research in ICT infrastracture), theory development (e.g. relating to the complexities of multi-professional team working) and empirical (e.g. how our findings might inform the design and implementation of technologies that are less likely to be resisted).

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.
The full article is readable via the navigation bar at the top of the abstract.
Mandatory reading for NEHTA and DoH as well as all State Health Department CIOs andCCIOs.
David.

Thursday, November 13, 2014

Review Of The Ongoing Post - Budget Controversy 13th November 2014. No Sign Of Stopping!

Budget Night was on Tuesday 13th May, 2014 and the fuss has still not settled by a long shot.
It is amazing how the discussion on the GP Co-Payment just runs and runs. Some more this week.
Here are some of the more interesting articles I have spotted this 24th week since it was released.
Other financial matters are still also bubbling along and now with Parliament not sitting for a few weeks it is even harder to be sure where things will actually land!
The Government response to Ebola seems to be finally lifting off and the war between doctors and pharmacists has gone ballistic. How stupid are these turf wars!

General.

Tony Abbott's personal approval up, but major policies unpopular: Fairfax Ipsos poll

Date November 3, 2014

James Massola and Heath Aston

EXCLUSIVE
Prime Minister Tony Abbott's personal approval has surged with voters over the past three months, while the Coalition has also clawed back support but still narrowly trails Labor in the two-party preferred vote.
The first Fairfax Ipsos nationwide poll shows Mr Abbott and Opposition Leader Bill Shorten are now tied as preferred prime minister, but, worryingly for the government, three key planks of its policy reform agenda are deeply unpopular with voters.
A whopping 64 per cent of voters opposed deregulating the setting of university fees, with just 28 per cent in favour. Forty per cent of voters supported Mr Abbott's signature paid parental leave scheme and 54 per cent opposed it. 
And 41 per cent of voters backed a rise in the GST in exchange for income tax cuts – an idea that came into sharp focus last week as Mr Abbott called for a debate about the federation and tax system – while 52 per cent opposed the idea.
-----

PM claws back from budget lows

Phillip Coorey Chief political correspondent
Prime Minister Tony Abbott and his Coalition government have clawed back to their strongest position since the controversial May budget but would still struggle if an election were held today.
The inaugural Fairfax/Ipsos national poll, which follows recent policy wins in the Parliament and a strong standing on the world stage, shows Mr Abbott closing the gap to match Bill Shorten as preferred prime minister and making strong gains in terms of personal approval.
On a two-party preferred basis, the Coalition trails Labor by 49 per cent to 51 per cent. It has pulled a 5 percentage point lead in the primary vote at 42 per cent to 37 per cent. The Greens are on 12 per cent while Clive Palmer’s Palmer United Party rates just 3 per cent nationally.
-----

Tasmanian hospitals dangerous and patients dying, nurses tell funding inquiry

ABC
November 4, 2014, 8:20 pm
Tasmanian's hospitals are operating under dangerous conditions and nurses believe patients have died because the system is overstretched, a Senate inquiry has been told.
The inquiry has been warned by a federally-funded health care provider that Tasmanians will be worse off under looming state and federal funding cuts.
The Labor-dominated inquiry is investigating the impact of Commonwealth funding cuts on hospital and health services.
It is estimated the Federal Government is cutting more than $2 billion from Tasmanian health funding over the next 20 years.
-----

Stage set for big bank showdown with Hockey

Date November 5, 2014

Clancy Yeates

Banking reporter

The stage is being set for a showdown between Joe Hockey and four of the most powerful corporations in the country.
In one corner is a Treasurer facing the prospect of finishing the year without passing key budget measures because they're simply too unpopular.
In the other, corporate titans with millions of customers and hundreds of thousands of small shareholders accustomed to big dividends: the big banks.
The battle will be over who wears the cost of making the financial system more resilient to economic shocks. At least, that's what looks likely after the salvos fired by the chief executives of Westpac and ANZ Bank in recent days.
-----

Supermarket promotions undermining public health

7 November, 2014 Christie Moffat
Australia’s two major supermarket chains are using alcohol discounts to entice new customers, undermining public health initiatives to reduce excessive drinking, research reveals.
A new study in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health examined the alcohol discount offers available across 34 Coles/Bi-Lo and Woolworths supermarkets in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane over a one-week period, and found that 33 of the 34 outlets offered “unprompted” alcohol discounts on receipts for a free bottle of wine.
Point-of-sale and off-trade discounts and promotions were often ‘unmeasured’ and had few legislative or regulatory restrictions, the authors said, with bundling discounts becoming increasingly common in Australian supermarkets.
-----

Medibank Private Sale.

Opposition: Why the Minister should retain veto power over rises in private health premiums

Marie McInerney | Nov 06, 2014 5:59PM | EMAIL | PRINT
The Conversation recently ran this analysis of the draft report of the Federal Government’s Competition Policy Review headed by Professor Ian Harper.
In it, Elizabeth Savage, Professor of Health Economics at University of Technology Sydney, said there were two significant changes to the private health insurance industry that are likely to have an impact on both consumers and the sector.
The first is the removal of regulation that requires ministerial approval for increases in private health insurance premiums, which is tied to evidence of increased cost structures, and its replacement by a “price monitoring scheme”. This will allow increases in insurance premiums only to be subject to competitors’ behaviour in what is a highly concentrated industry. (Top four companies have 75% of policy revenues; the top two – Medibank Private and BUPA – have 56% of the market.)
-----

Ebloa.

Govt to assist Ebola workers

6:55pm, Nov 4
Andrew Greene
The federal government has reportedly reached an agreement that would allow it to send Australian health workers to fight the deadly Ebola virus.
The Federal Government is on Wednesday expected to announce plans to help Australian medical staff fight the Ebola virus in Africa.
The ABC has been told cabinet’s National Security Committee had decided to assist volunteers who want to travel to Ebola hotspots in Sierra Leone.
For weeks the government has refused to dispatch doctors or soldiers to west Africa unless it had “iron clad” commitments from other nations to evacuate medical staff who got infected with the deadly disease.
-----

Tony Abbott ramps up Ebola response with medics and money

AUSTRALIAN medics will be sent to Sierra Leone as part of the nation’s “ramped up” response to help control Ebola in West Africa.
Tony Abbott today announced the government would send Australian volunteers to the African country as part of an agreement with the United Kingdom to manage a 100-bed field hospital, and to care for the Australians if they get sick.
The British-controlled centre will be staffed by Australian-owned medical provider Aspen, but the majority of workers will be locals.
Mr Abbott also announced an additional $24 million to help combat the epidemic.
-----

Australians could make up just 10% of team to run Ebola hospital in Sierra Leone

Date November 6, 2014 - 9:07AM

Latika Bourke

National political reporter

The Australian government has contributed a further $24 million to respond to the Ebola crisis, including $20 million for a hospital in Sierra Leone. Photo: AP
The number of Australians dispatched to West Africa to treat Ebola patients could be as low as 24 under the federal government's $20 million pledge to staff a hospital in Sierra Leone.
The private company contracted to run the Australian government's response, Aspen Medical said on Thursday it was vital to ensure locals were not "disenfranchised" in foreign efforts to help their domestic fight against the disease.
-----

Ebola: Tony Abbott to support Australian volunteers' fight in West Africa

Date November 5, 2014 - 6:49PM

Dan Harrison

Health and Indigenous Affairs Correspondent

Australia will step up its response to the Ebola virus by contracting a private company to operate a hospital in Sierra Leone and deploying technical experts to support the international effort.
Prime Minister Tony Abbott announced on Wednesday that Australia would contribute a further $24 million to the international fight against Ebola, on top of $18 million it has already committed.
The latest commitment includes $20 million to staff a British-built Ebola treatment facility in Sierra Leone over the next eight months. 
-----

Ebola migration ban best for nation, Peter Dutton says

Jared Owens

HEALTH Minister Peter Dutton has rebuffed World Health Organisation concerns about Australia’s suspension of migration from Ebola-affected nations, claiming West African language barriers and funeral rites make those travellers an unacceptable risk.
Isabelle Nuttall, director of WHO’s alert and response department, said the United Nations agency had asked both countries to justify the tough border measures, which she has described as “detrimental and ineffective”.
Australia on October 27 became the first Western nation to suspend migration from Ebola-hit west African nations, and Canada followed suit four days later.
The WHO’s criticism came as the Abbott government announced it would hire Canberra-based Aspen Medical to provide about 240 staff for a 100-bed medical facility being built by the British government in Sierra Leone.
-----

Aust health firm to manage Ebola unit

AAP NOVEMBER 05, 2014 5:34PM SHARE
ASPEN Medical is not a household name, but it's familiar to thousands of defence personnel who know what to do when a roadside bomb blows off a leg.
THE privately owned firm, based in Canberra and employing more than 2000 people, has been contracted by the federal government to run a 100-bed Ebola treatment centre in Sierra Leone.
It offers medical services to defence, civilian agencies and private firms, including medical evacuation services to resource companies in Australia and the Middle East.
Aspen also provides battle-casualty-care training for defence personnel deploying to the Middle East and Afghanistan.
-----

Grudging response to plea to send Australian medics to fight Ebola perplexing, embarrassing

Date November 9, 2014 - 12:15AM
EDITORIAL
The reaction was swift. Within a day of the call going out, more than 100 Australian health workers registered their interest in one of the most gruelling jobs in the world, working in a new British-built, Australian-funded Ebola treatment centre in Sierra Leone. Their rapid and selfless response embodies the very best humanitarian spirit. Contrast that with the grudging approach of the Australian government to the Ebola crisis in West Africa.
From the start, the Abbott government has appeared slow to grasp the urgency of the unfolding disaster and to be content with doing the minimum to fulfil Australia's obligations as a global citizen.
-----

GP Co-Payment.

Co-pay 'windfall' will amount to just 40-cents

6 November, 2014 Paul Smith
The $2 "windfall" the Federal Government promised GPs from its co-payment plan will turn into little more than 40 cents once practices have paid the bureaucratic costs of collecting the cash, the AMA claims.
Under the proposed reform, which is supposed to be in place from next July, Medicare rebates for seeing GPs will be cut by $5, with GPs encouraged to charge a $7 gap.
Federal Health Minister Peter Dutton has sold the policy by claiming the $7 fee will result in a "$2 windfall" for GPs.
But the AMA has commissioned new modelling that suggests the red tape in collecting the payment will leave practices with a fistful of cents rather than dollars.
-----

$2 windfall for GPs is rubbish: AMA

6th Nov 2014
GPs will be forced to stump up between $1.41 and $1.61 per service to administer the government's proposed $7 co-payment, AMA modelling shows.
The cost estimate, released in an AMA report today, quantifies the red-tape burden of the co-payment on GPs by taking into account things like paperwork, back office time, financial institution fees and cash handling costs. 
The report says that when bad debts are added to the mix, their costs would quickly erode the $2 per service that the government said would be retained by practices under its model. 
"It shows the statements by the government about a $2 windfall for general practice is rubbish," said AMA Council of General Practice chair Dr Brian Morton. 
-----

Parliament hears Lismore Hospital struggle with health cuts

Chris Calcino | 8th Nov 2014 7:00 AM
THE Northern Star was quoted in New South Wales Parliament as Labor attacked moves to cut $15 billion in Commonwealth funding to the state's health system over 10 years.
Shadow Health Minister Walt Secord called for the Baird Government to oppose the Federal cuts along with the introduction of a $7 Medicare co-payment for visiting a GP.
NSW Health modelling has shown the $7 GP tax would create a 27% per cent increase in emergency department patients who would otherwise see a general practitioner.
-----

Pharmacy Related Articles.

Pharmacists can perform many of the tasks a doctor normally does, like issuing medical certificates

  • Lisa Herbertson
  • Liverpool Leader
  • November 03, 2014 4:00PM
A new campaign could mean less trips to the local doctor, with pharmacists stepping up to the plate to offer basic medical advise and even medical certificates.
Lillian Chen and her husband Jonathan run Chen’s Pharmacist Advice in Hammondville and Chen’s Pharmacy in Wattle Grove and she said that the benefits of visiting a pharmacy can include less waiting time and no appointments required.
But for those needing a doctor’s certificate it may be of most interest to know that pharmacists can issue certificates (for a fee) for sick leave absence from workplaces for certain conditions.
“It’s called a sickness certificate, and it’s for certain conditions, and can be administered by pharmacists like us,” she said.
-----

Ownership threats galvanise Guild: Quilty

6 November, 2014 Christie Moffat
Despite confirmation of support from both the Coalition and Labor, the Pharmacy Guild of Australia is continuing to fight the recommendations of the Competition Policy Review.
Also known as the Harper Review, the panel released its Draft Report in September, recommending the removal of community pharmacy ownership and location rules.
Writing in Guild newsletter Forefront, executive director David Quilty said that in the coming weeks, the Guild would submit a comprehensive cost benefit analysis to the Review, to demonstrate that the public benefits of the “highly successful and much trusted” pharmacy ownership rules “far outweigh any costs”.
“If there is one issue that galvanises the Pharmacy Guild, it is pharmacy ownership,” Mr Quilty said.
-----

Pharmacists want cash for patient interaction

6 November, 2014 Tessa Hoffman and Paul Smith
Pharmacists say they should be paid fees for dispensing medicine based on the time they spend "interacting" with the patient.
In a poll published in the 2014 UTS Pharmacy Barometer, 89% of pharmacists questioned said they wanted a two-tier fee system to better fund clinical services they are providing.
Under the PBS, taxpayers currently pay pharmacists more than $1 billion a year for dispensing.
Calls for time-based dispensing fees have traditionally been rejected by the Pharmacy Guild of Australia, the lobby group for pharmacist owners that negotiates with government over funding for the industry.
-----

Medicare Locals.

Cross-border health will stay focus: Ley

By BLAIR THOMSON
Nov. 3, 2014, midnight
SUSSAN Ley has moved to hose down concerns about changes to the health system.
Under the new national plan, Albury and Wodonga will be in separate primary health networks divided on state lines.
Hume Medicare Local chief executive David Dart has raised concerns about the impact of the changes and said having the towns in different regions would be a barrier to providing services.
Indi MP Cathy McGowan also raised concerns over the changes with Health Minister Peter Dutton in Parliament.
-----
Comment:
I also have to say reading all the articles I still have no idea what is actually going to happen with the Budget at the end of the day. Maybe the next few weeks of parliament will clarify things this time but I doubt it. The Reps come back on Nov 14 for a British PM speech and the Senate in the following week. Both rise until the new year on Dec 4, 2014.
To remind readers there is also a great deal of useful health discussion here from The Conversation.
Also a huge section on the overall budget found here:
Enjoy.
David.

Wednesday, November 12, 2014

NEHTA Releases Its 2013-2014 Annual Report. Will This Be The Penultimate Annual Report?

This appeared last week.

NEHTA's Annual Report 2013-14 is now available

Created on Wednesday, 05 November 2014
NEHTA's Annual Report 2013-14 is now available and can be downloaded from here.
The National E-Health Transition Authority was established in 2005 by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) to help transform Australia’s health system by building the foundations for a national eHealth infrastructure.  
NEHTA is jointly funded by the Australian Government and all State and Territory Governments.
NEHTA's Annual and Financial Reports contain detailed information about its operations during the past financial year as well as an overview of its work programme.
ENDS
For media enquiries contact Alison Sweeney, Manager Media and Public Affairs on 02 8298 2669 / 0414 187 350 or send an email to media@nehta.gov.au
Here is the link:
The report is the usual load of self-promoting nonsense with no useful statistics and a lot of statistics that are meaningless in terms of NEHTA having actually made a difference to the health sector.
What I found fun were these bits.
1. P25
“Clinical safety
All NEHTA products and services are rigorously reviewed prior to release to make sure they are safe, useful and fit for purpose – nothing is released unless the risk is as low as reasonably possible.
A continuous improvement process is in place to identify and quickly deal with any issues that arise in using the national eHealth record system and the Healthcare Identifiers Service.
NEHTA works closely with the Commonwealth Department of Health, the National Infrastructure Operator and the Department of Human Services to assess and monitor risk, and improve safety of the system.”
On a crucial topic like safety we see NEHTA being so vague it is just unbelievable. It is clearly seen as ‘best efforts’ issue as far as NEHTA is concerned. Not good enough in my view.
2.P38
“NEHTA’s long term objectives are:
NEHTA has provided the foundations for eHealth usage in Australia. Optimal usage of eHealth and the Personally Controlled Electronic Health Record (PCEHR) and creating a critical mass is dependent on building on these foundations and working with clinical groups and software vendors to achieve this.
Continued collaboration with stakeholders along with the implementation of medications management and chronic disease management programmes will help drive uptake of the PCEHR towards a ‘tipping point’ of use.
NEHTA’s work will need to be aligned with both the refreshed National eHealth Strategy and the Government’s response to the PCEHR Review recommendations.”
I wonder where comments on review of how well what NEHTA has delivered is working etc. I can find nothing other than some glossy vignettes to demonstrate all the money spent on NEHTA over the last decade has made a difference. I note they are still spending $50M p.a. on consultants.
3. P47
“Going Concern
NEHTA Ltd has funding arrangements with the Federal, State and Territory Governments of Australia until 30 June 2015. It is expected that further funding will be provided to continue the NEHTA work programme beyond the 12 months from the date of this report and as such the financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis. Should the funding not continue there is material uncertainty as to whether the Company will continue as a going concern and therefore, whether the Company will realise its assets and extinguish its liabilities in the normal course of business and at the amounts stated in the financial report. Due to this uncertainty, NEHTA has set aside cash reserves that would be sufficient to extinguish any remaining liabilities that exist at the time, should further funding not be provided.”
Looks like NEHTA is contemplating its own demise.
4. P56
“e. In February 2013, NEHTA was provided with a press release in which MMRGlobal (MMR) asserted on behalf of its subsidiary MyMedicalRecords that NEHTA and the Australian Government appeared to be infringing two of MMR’s Australian patents and other intellectual property. At that time, NEHTA had not received any contact from MMR asserting an infringement and no claim of patent infringement has been pursued by MMR against NEHTA since the press release was issued in February 2013.
As a result of the assertions made in the press release, NEHTA undertook a thorough investigation of MMR’s Australian patents, which revealed that there was no, nor had there ever been, an infringement of MMR’s Australian patents by NEHTA. That has been communicated to MMR’s lawyers both in the United States and Australia by NEHTA’s solicitors.
At this time, the directors do not expect there to be any significant impact on the Company’s stated financial position as set out in the financial statements read with the associated explanatory notes, as a result of MMR’s assertions.”
Looks like NEHTA is happy MMR does not have a prayer!
All in all worth a browse to see just how much money has been spent for so little outcome.
David.

Tuesday, November 11, 2014

The Consumers Health Forum (CHF) Has A Dummy Spit And Reveals A Distorted View Of The Caring Professions.

We had an interesting, evidence free press release from the Consumer Health Forum (CHF) a few days ago.

Doctors: the health evolution is here, move on or move out

3 November 2014 - 
Many lives and billions of dollars, could be saved by personally-controlled electronic health records yet their full potential is threatened by self-interested doctors who wrongly claim they are putting patients’ interests first.
“There is widespread support for the introduction of a personally-controlled electronic health record, including from consumers, medical leaders and other providers, as revealed in the latest edition of CHF’s journal  Health Voices, published today,” says CEO Adam Stankevicius.  “Australia has already waited far too long for an effective national eHealth system --- more than ten years since government funding began in earnest. 
----- End Extract.
Here is the link to the .pdf.
There is reporting here.

Consumers and doctors clash over health records

Date November 8, 2014 - 6:17PM

Dan Harrison

Health and Indigenous Affairs Correspondent

A patient advocacy group has accused doctors of being motivated by self-interest in arguing against patients having direct access to test results via electronic health records.
Pathology and diagnostic imaging reports will be able to be added to electronic health records in the next update of the system, due later this year. 
Patients will be able to access these results following a seven-day delay, which is designed to give doctors time to manage communication of results with their patients.
But the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners is fighting the change, arguing that patients should not be able to access test results until they have been reviewed by the doctor who ordered them. 
College president Frank Jones said doctors had a responsibility to first check the results of tests they had ordered.
"The College has no issue whatsoever with patients having access to their medical records ... it's how it happens that is our concern," he said.
In a statement this week, the college said it would sometimes be undesirable for patients to find out results before any discussion with their GP in which the doctor could provide contextual advice and support. 
Lots more here:
Also we had this:

College told to ditch self-interest over patients' pathology results

3 November, 2014 30 comments
The RACGP has been told to ditch "self-interest" and stop blocking patients from prompt access to their pathology results.
The row is brewing over the decision to automatically upload virtually all pathology and diagnostic imaging results on to the PCEHR after seven days.
The college fears patients will learn they have serious conditions like melanomas or sexual diseases like chlamydia on the system before the GP has been able to contact them.
But the stance has outraged the Consumers Health Forum of Australia (CHF), which says that full potential of the e-health system is "threatened by self-interested doctors who wrongly claim they are putting patients' interests first".
In a media release entitled Doctors: the health evolution is here, move on or move out, the CHF CEO Adam Stankevicius said: "The RACGP is arguing against patients learning the results of path tests on 'safety' grounds, asserting that patients getting bad news before hearing it from them could be subject to ‘unnecessary distress'.
Lots more here:
I will choose to ignore the suggestion that doctors are pursuing ‘self - interest’ as I have no idea just what interest any doctor would have (except in very unusual circumstances) of not sharing patient results with the patient. What this seems to be is part of some CHF ‘Class War’ against doctors for the most obscure of ‘political’ reasons.
What I am even more amazed about is the first paragraph here:
“Many lives and billions of dollars, could be saved by personally-controlled electronic health records yet their full potential is threatened by self-interested doctors who wrongly claim they are putting patients’ interests first.”
Clearly there is no evidence of any sort that the PCEHR is working and it is at present just blind faith that it will in the future offer benefits that are being suggested.
Having results shared between pathologists, clinicians and their patients is the way it has always worked and it has worked pretty well.
Before just such an outrageous statement and claim for benefit is made - maybe the CHF might like to demonstrate just where the benefits claimed will come from over the present, already electronically enabled systems.
The magical thinking we see from groups like this, and the lack of evidence offered, makes one wonder why anyone would take the CHF seriously.
David.