Greg Twyford wrote: > Ian Cheong wrote: > >> Really much the same story with the mega health VPN concept that will >> not die...... > > > Ian, > > Yes, I agree with you wholeheartedly. That one has left me shaking my > head from day one, and the Ministers' press releases last year about > managed VPNs for Divisions still have me wondering, even more with > HealthConnect shelved. > > The only bigger disbelief were the original documents about BMMS that > said it would be up and running in twelve months. I just had to put them > down and get some fresh air. I suspect a lot of senior bureauvrats start by making various assumptions and it takes a long time to realise they are wrong. Some documents clearly indicate the author assumes medication and disease coding are already in place. Many assume EHRs have a standard programmable API (for example, that you could give a program to GPs which extracts diabetes data and sends it to divisions) Others are 'political' assumptions: that GPs will absorb the costs of computerisation, and don't mind HIC/HeSA controlling comms,
These are not unreasonable assumptions. Most other areas of computing have standard APIs, for example, and in non_IT areas GPs often absorb the costs of government policy without a whimper. Ian _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
