We are merely the custodians of the record - we hold the record in trust for the person to whom it is most relevant. If you practice proper medicine and you do what is right and document the history and the examination and show how you came to the conclusion that you did, as required by law, then you have little to fear. I have never met anybody nor heard of anybody who was told "indemnity insurer tells him his arse isn't sufficiently covered". My understanding is not documentation, per se, but the lack of it that is the problem.
What we have now is very poor documentation often secondary to very poor medicine. Better no medicine than bad medicine. Most mistakes are made not by not knowing but by not looking. If people are afraid of the system, then they are better off out of it. What I would implore is the ability to leverage the knowledge in and the power of a patient-centric record and preferably with access from the patient. A good example is that of Andy Gore of Intel quoted in Fortune Dec 2005 when he reports on having prostate cancer. He was told that surgery was the best option and that was pretty much all there was to it. Was it though? It took very little to discover that there was much, much more to it. There were alternatives to surgery. No surgeon advised him to take them seriously. But the expert opinions were just that - opinions, based on little if any hard data. Data did exist. What he found most shocking is that no one had done the hard work of pulling it together. Plainly, Grove would have to do it himself. What he "found most appalling, in the end, was the utter fixity of belief among doctors who failed to separate knowledge from conventional wisdom. Even the doctor who carried out the procedure was captive to it". Grove had prostate cancer in 1995 and researched it himself and came up with the idea (then) that brachytherapy was the best therapy. It is interesting that the patient can now often have as much information as the doctor. What he often lacks is experience. I was amazed when in the US in the 1970s that the students often had more knowledge on a particular subject than the consultants and they (consultants) often had to defend their position. Grove apparently fostered a culture at Intel in which "knowledge power" would trump "position power". If you talk to patients (who are not your patients) is that they are amazed at the inability of the brightest and most powerful group in the community to embrace the power of information technology for their( the patients') benefit. David de Bhál www.v-practice.com -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Twyford Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 4:48 PM To: General Practice Computing Group Talk Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] Clinical software recommendations David de Bhál wrote: > The view is that the patient is more important than the practitioner in the > whole equation. > > David de Bhál > www.v-practice.com David, I'm not sure what that means. In one sense if I see my GP, I certainly think my problem is the most important one I'll have that day, but I'm sure the GP's view is often different. Who is right will vary from occasion to occasion. I guess it also depends on who your business partner is. If the GP is contracting to use your system, he won't be too happy if his indemnity insurer tells him his arse isn't sufficiently covered if he does so. If you are selling to the patient, it may be a different story. From a societal provision perspective, we need to keep most of our doctors practising, even if they don't always do so optimally. Simply because the alternative is likely to be a worse outcome for many of us if we have a lot fewer of them. Greg -- Greg Twyford Information Management & Technology Program Officer Canterbury Division of General Practice E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph.: 02 9787 9033 Fax: 02 9787 9200 PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL *********************************************************************** The information contained in this e-mail and their attached files, including replies and forwarded copies, are confidential and intended solely for the addressee(s) and may be legally privileged or prohibited from disclosure and unauthorised use. If you are not the intended recipient, any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and/or publication or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance upon this message or its attachments is prohibited. All liability for viruses is excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law. *********************************************************************** _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.6/324 - Release Date: 4/25/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.6/324 - Release Date: 4/25/2006 _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
