The world of E-Health
Because we’ve been exploring E-Health Australia, I thought it would be interesting to take a look at the systems in place around the world. Many countries have either implemented or are in the process of implementing their own versions of E-Health. I found a document called “The e health revolution—easier said than done” which gives a brief run down on what some other countries have been up to in the world of E-Health. http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1112/12rp03#_Toc309206390
Czech Republic
The electronic health record in the Czech Republic, known as IZIP, commenced in 2005 and is widely used by the healthcare community and patients. As of 2009, more than a third of healthcare organizations and 10% of the population had signed up. Their records include patient contact with medical practitioners, consultation history, dental history, test results, vaccination history and hospital reports. In their system, practitioners and patients have access to a patient’s record, but it is only able to be altered by a practitioner. The patient can authorize for a practitioner to have access to their record and can choose which information a medical professional can see. In 2008, the Czech Republic also incorporated Health Insurance so that patients are able to log on a view what payments they have received from their insurance provider. While other European countries are not as far along as the Czech Republic, most have made a start or are looking at doing so.
Denmark
Denmark has a high level of public satisfaction with their healthcare system and has had great success with their E-Health system. Denmark’s national E-Health system was launched in 2005 and provides patients and healthcare professionals with a single access point to healthcare services. Patients can log on to their personal profile to book doctors’ appointments, renew prescriptions, review their medical history or diagnostic tests and even communicate with medical practitioners via email (practitioners receive incentives in the form of a small fee for emails with patients). In Denmark 98% of primary care practices have access to electronic medical records where they are able to enter patient history, manage a patient’s medications, make problem lists, generate eScripts and send them straight to a pharmacy, view hospital records and issue automatic preventative reminders. It is believed that Denmark’s E-Health success is likely due to their small population and abundance of IT-savvy citizens. The Danish government have placed a high importance on E-Health and even funded primary care practitioners to access technical support to encourage further adoption of the E-Health system.
Read more about E-Health in Denmark at http://www.sum.dk/~/media/Filer%20-%20Publikationer_i_pdf/2012/Sunheds-IT/Sunheds_IT_juni_web.ashx
The United Kingdom
HealthSpace, just one facet of the UK’s E-Health system, is an online personal organizer which has been described as pointless and irrelevant. HealthSpace allows patients to enter health information (e.g. blood pressure readings) and to arrange appointments with medical practitioners. Uptake of HealthSpace has been disappointing with over 2.4 million people invited to join between 2007 and 2010, and only 173,000 people actually doing so. E-Health systems in the US as well as the UK have copped similar criticism and have been accused of trying to accomplish too much, too soon as opposed to the Danish E-Health system which steadily progressed over several years.
The United States
Advances to E-Health in the United States have lagged behind other countries, with no E-Health system in place until 2009. A survey in 2006 revealed widespread concerns regarding the setup costs for practitioners if they were to implement E-Health which was seen as a major barrier. In 2009 an economic stimulus was passed which meant that medical practitioners were eligible for $44,000 – $63,750 US for showing that they are using health information technology in a meaningful way. Hospitals were eligible for several million dollars. The incentives, which began in 2011, will be phased out over time and by 2015 practitioners will fined if they haven’t converted to electronic health records. Another major concern which may be stalling E-Health in America is privacy. America does not have extensive privacy laws in place like other countries do and there are worries that any information presented in electronic format is easily accessed, shared and downloaded. These fears are not shared by all and some practitioners are enthusiastic about E-Health and are trying to get patients onboard.
How do you think the Australian E-Health System compares?
E-Health Blog 2013 
In my opinion, comparing between the Australian E-Health system and the E-Health systems of the countries listed above, Australia has more privacy on the system than America does. Comparing to the UK, the Australian system only allows practitioners to add medical information, and the patient can choose wether or not to show it or keeping it private. According to the UK system that patients can add their own medical information, it is not a good idea because the patient might enter wrong health issues about him/her self, or they might not have the time or forget to write their health problems and medications the’ve got. Coming to Czech Republic and Denmark e-health systems, i can say that their e-health is better than the Australian in one way is that most of the citizens are registered on the system and every one knows about it. Whereas in Australia not everybody knows about the e-health system, so campaigns and ads needs to be made to push more Australians to register for their own benefit.
I just posted a comment and then my internet crashed so it is all gone…cant say I am very happy about it!
Ok so I personally believe that the system that is currently being introduced in Australia is most similar to that in the UK.. which is actually quite disheartening really considering it has been somewhat of a flop. Letting the consumer have so much influence over their eHealth record does not seem to be producing the most effective results, and almost always ensures that the system will remain incomplete. Further, it seems there is a correlation between the level of time and effort put into the programs and the results. Trying to just throw it all out there straight away does not seem to result in high uptake and implementation of the program as in the case of the UK, however a calculated and gradual proccess as in Denmark seems to produce better results.
Efforts in Australia need to focus on not trying to do too much too fast, advertising needs to be increased (I only just saw my first ehealth ad today) and the benefits of this program need to be promoted! All of the different parts to the system need to be introduced over time and in a well thought out and planned manner.