> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Twyford > Sent: Tuesday, 25 July 2006 2:50 PM
> The recent discussions re the appropriate standards for electronic > transmission of clinical data, electronic referrals under Medicare and > faxed referrals are informed by the attached AMA newsletter. > > Obviously the AMA is trying to make it simpler and recognises that the > HeSA PKI is a bit of a showstopper, as is the requirement to follow-up > faxed referrals with the original. Greg, Two things are being confused here. The AMA newsletter says: "IT Standards for referrals Doctors are reminded that under the Electronic Transactions Act 1999 electronic referrals, pathology or diagnostic imaging orders must comply with Medicare Australia Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) Standards. PKI is the only approved encryption standard for these transmissions. One of the problems of course is that the person to whom the transmission is sent must also have PKI in order to read the message. Following member queries in relation to faxed referrals or requests, the AMA has confirmed that at present the original signed document must subsequently be forwarded. Following AMA representations Medicare Australia is seeking advice as to whether a fax copy can be considered compliant with the legislation and thus potentially allow the elimination of one more bit of red tape." In the first paragraph, "electronic referrals" refers to emailed referral messages or letters. The second paragraph then jumps to talking about whether faxed referrals (presumably those that contain a handwritten signature) will fulfill the Medicare requirements or whether the original document must be posted or otherwise delivered to the recipient, who presumably has to store that original for possible audit by Medicare. Apparently, despite thousands if not millions of referrals having been faxed over the past few years, Medicare still has not decided whether they fulfill the requirements for Medicare benefits purposes. The first paragraph skipped over the issue of electronic referrals (that is, those sent by email) being able to be signed by the sender with his or her digital individual certificate, which serves as a legally valid signature, which means that no other document needs to be sent. Clear now? I thought not. I suggest that we just all go on sending good referrals by whatever means and in whatever format we find most efficient and helpful for patients' care. Oliver Frank, general practitioner 255 North East Road, Hampstead Gardens South Australia 5086 Ph. 08 8261 1355 Fax 08 8266 5149 _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
