You wtote: Drug interaction databases need to be not dangerous (example a patient being allergic to Bactrim but the doctor can happily prescribe Trimethoprim)
The problem is not with the software developer but with the Doctor using the software. When there was a big uptake of IT by GP's a few years ago, when HIC offered all this money for IT uptake, there were lots of articles published about GP's printing scrripts with default settings of the program - ie. Take 1-2 tablets when eyedrops were prescribed etc. I still regularly see scripts generated elsewhere, where the Doctor hasn't bothered to set up the margins. I still regularly get new patients and there health summary contains the same diagnoses twice, the same drugs are prescibed twice (example Losec 1 nocte, Probitor 1 nocte) - only because the Doctors don't know how to use there software, or they can't be bothered. When it comes to allergies: Bactrim allergy implies allergy to Bactrim. That implies save to give Trimethoprim. If the allergy was to Trimethoprim, the Doctor should enter the allergy as Trimethoprim. We all have patients that are sensitive to Valium, but they can safely take Ducene. Thus there is a difference in how one enters a allergy. I still have female patients that claim Triphasil didn't agree with them, but Triquilar is 100% okay - yet is exactly the same drug. Amoxil allergy again does not imply a Penicillin allergy. Cedric ____________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________ -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Christie Sent: Monday, 10 July 2006 8:28 PM To: General Practice Computing Group Talk Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] Should clinical software be regulated? I must admit I think there should be a degree of regulation or standards that software must meet to be able to be sold on the Australian Medical market. There are many bright spark IT people that really don't have a great idea how their software is to be used at the coalface. New innovations that seemed to be a good idea at the time came to nought. A lot of programming energy can be expended on vapor to the detriment of basic needs of doctors. If there were some regulations at least that would guide the software people in the direction that their software needs to aim. Drug interaction databases need to be not dangerous (example a patient being allergic to Bactrim but the doctor can happily prescribe Trimethoprim) And software needs to be designed that data can be exported so that all the other packages can pick it up if a software vendor goes out of business. Some basic level of software regulation I think would be a great idea. Perhaps NEHTA could look at this. Dr John Van Dyck wrote: > > Hi David, > > Enjoy your wise reflections. > > Will do it was only an attempt at humour based on the acronym not on > any content J > > Sorry if it seemed in any way "irreverent" J I am continually amazed > by the number of acronyms one gets presented with each day. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *David More > *Sent:* Sunday, 9 July 2006 9:39 PM > *To:* General Practice Computing Group Talk; 'General Practice > Computing Group Talk' > *Subject:* RE: [GPCG_TALK] Should clinical software be regulated? > > Hi John, > > Go have a look at the site..I think if you look closely you be > surprised. > > Cheers > > David > > ---- > Dr David G More MB, PhD, FACHI > Phone +61-2-9438-2851 Fax +61-2-9906-7038 > Skype Username : davidgmore > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Health IT Blog - www.aushealthit.blogspot.com > > On Sun, 9 Jul 2006 21:26:22 +1000, Dr John Van Dyck wrote: > > > CCHIT does that translate as "shit"?? pardon my ignorance > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Behalf Of Ian Cheong > Sent: Sunday, 9 July 2006 8:19 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; General Practice Computing Group Talk > Cc: Enrico Coiera > > > Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] Should clinical software be regulated? > > > > > > At 5:36 pm +1000 8/7/06, David More wrote: > > >> Hi David, > > >> > > >> Please go to www.cchit.org (if you haven't) and see how the yanks > are doing it..planned, reasonable and not too expensive for most > except the open-source > > >> people - for whom I think there should be a fee exemption. > > >> > > >> Their style of effort would do much, if transferred here, to make > things better - not perfect..but a place to start building I reckon. > > >> > > >> > > > In September 2005, HHS awarded CCHIT a three-year contract to > > develop > and evaluate certification criteria and create an inspection process > for HIT in three > > > areas: > > > > > > * Ambulatory EHRs for the office-based physician or provider * > Inpatient EHRs for hospitals and health systems * The Network > components through which they > > > interoperate and share information > > > > > > Given that they appear to be embarking on the beginning of this > journey, I look forward to the output of the process. > > > > > > The history in australia is well known. > > > > > > > > > Ian. > > > -- > > > Dr Ian R Cheong, BMedSc, FRACGP, GradDipCompSc, MBA(Exec) Health > Informatics Consultant, Brisbane, Australia Internet: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > (for urgent matters, please send a copy to my practice email as > > well: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > > > > > PRIVACY NOTE > > > I am happy for others to forward on email sent by me to public email > lists. Please ask my permission first if you wish to forward private > email to other > > > parties. _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk > mailing list [email protected] > http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Gpcg_talk mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk > > > > > > __________ NOD32 1.1651 (20060708) Information __________ > > > > > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > > > http://www.eset.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > _______________________________________________ > Gpcg_talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk > _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
