Would an E-Health awareness week work for Australia??
Author Archives: loz@latrobe
Are financial incentives they key to get the E-Health ball rolling?
When I was checking out E-Health systems from around the world, one of the things I liked about what the United States has done, was the fact that they are providing financial incentives so that the healthcare sector will be more inclined to implement the system.
I have just found an article on Pulse+IT which suggests that this could be what is missing from our own system, particularly in relation to the aged care sector.
Financial support the missing link for aged care PCEHR uptake:
According to the article, the Aged Care Industry Information Technology Council (ACIITC) is urging the government to consider financial incentives so that they can be PCEHR-ready, claiming that lack of important software has forced a slow uptake in the aged care sector.
Aged care is one of the areas that I believe would gain the most from the E-Health system- so this is something that I believe should be considered. Patients in this sector are often on countless medications, see several healthcare practitioners and are in and out of nursing homes and hospitals. I know I would struggle to keep up with all this information if this were me. PCEHR would make things a lot easier but if the aged care industry does not have the key software- everyone cannot get involved and the system won’t work as effectively as it could. Funding for this could help with the uptake of the system.
ACIITC chair Suri Ramanathan claims that because pharmacists receive a PBS dispense fee for dispensing medications- they should be receiving incentives too. He says that they are one of the largest industries in the country and “facilities operate on a paper-thin margin, so for them to adopt the change, they need a little bit of a hand.”
Mr Ramanathan said that financial help is the “missing link” for E-Health to really get moving in the aged care industry. However, why stop at aged care? Surely many areas in the healthcare industry could use some financial help to get E-Health up and going.
From a pharmacist’s perspective, the more people healthcare industries that get involved in E-Health, the better. Like I have said previously, PCEHR is meant to provide a whole picture of a patient’s health and the key to this happening is getting all areas of the healthcare industry involved. If funding will inspire more to get on-board, then I believe it is something to really think about.
Do you think funding would encourage more healthcare professionals to implement E-Health?
Filed under Aged Care, Global E-Health, Issues with E-Health
Create your own Personally Controlled Electronic Health Record (PCEHR)
Filed under About E-Health, E-Health opt-in
The world of E-Health
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?
Filed under About E-Health, Global E-Health
E-Health Australia: Security fears
In this day and age when we are exposed to identity theft, computer hacking and fraud it is no surprise that people would be concerned by the prospect of online sharing of their private health information.
While the Australian Government is telling us that PCEHRs will be secure, Graham Ingram, the general manager of infosec emergency response centre AusCERT and one of Australia’s most respected security professionals, says, “they are lying to us.”
“If I can view my electronic health record from the Qantas Club or internet cafe, we have a problem. If we can’t secure the machines, we can’t secure the records.”
Check out SC Magazine’s interview with Graham Ingram to see what he had to say: VIDEO: E-Health Australia: Security ‘disaster’
Also check out OAIC’s Factsheet: Top 10 tips for protecting the personal information in your eHealth record
For more information go to http://www.scmagazine.com.au/News/281217,australias-ehealth-record-a-security-disaster.aspx
What do you think? Are you concerned about the security of Australia’s E-Health system? I’m interested to hear your thoughts!
Filed under Issues with E-Health, Security
E-Health Australia: An incomplete picture
Imagine an E-Health system where any GP, specialist or pharmacist could view the complete medical history of a patient. A system where they could find anything and everything from a patient’s history including current medications, medical conditions, immunisation records, allergies, past test results and doctors referrals. A system where a medical practitioner can get a comprehensive view of someone’s health and therefore provide them with the best possible health care. Unfortunately, Australia’s E-Health system will not appear quite like this. Instead, patients will be able to pick and choose what appears on their Personally Controlled Electronic Health Record (PCEHR), that is, if they even decide to have one all.
I understand that healthcare can be a very personal topic for many people. And I get that people do have conditions that they wouldn’t necessarily want to share. But how can a treating medical practitioner get the full picture of somebody’s health when things can so easily be omitted? What may be considered insignificant or embarrassing to a patient may just be the piece of the puzzle a doctor needs to get answers.
The worrying thing to me is that if people are able to select which things they wish to exclude, treating doctors could easily miss vital clues for diagnosis, or worse still prescribe medications that interfere seriously with previously diagnosed conditions. Pharmacists could unwittingly dispense medications that patients are allergic to or have had reactions to in the past. If all the information is present, things are much clearer and it is easier for medical professionals to provide better and safer treatment.
True, there probably are certain things could be excluded without implications on future healthcare, but where do we draw the line on what is needed and what is not? It’s not as if the health records are there for anyone and everyone to read, they are for treating healthcare professionals.
What is your view on Australia’s take on E-Health? Do you agree that patients should have full control of their E-Health record?
Let me know what you think!
Filed under Issues with E-Health
E-Health Blog 2013 