> ?Identifying diabetic patient cohorts (+/-co-morbidities)?
Exploring how a practice identifies and manages these patients
ie. Diagnosis coding, disease registers, outcome indicators
I think it was at a more meta level - i.e. the Atlas says
"census stats tell us that your area has a diabetic
level of 5% yet the data we have extracted has
only 1% of your population identified as diabetic.. lets
look at how your practice goes about identifying and managing
patients to see if we can work out why we are missing
so many".. so not really identifying them in the sense of
"you missed Mary Smith", but "there are some out there
you missed".
Certainly the datasets I have seen extracted for the Atlas
are de-identified.
As I said, too, I feel that identifying data by GP and sending it to
Canberra won't be acceptable to many GPs. Adelaide Western hasn't taken
the data beyond themselves.
True - the Atlas provides information for a GP about
themselves so is not so threatening.. not sure how keen
they'd be to see it compared against other practices.
But maybe they should accept the reality of the
world - most of us get held up to performance standards
in our jobs.. why not GP's (now I know there are good
reasons why making performance metrics the be all and
end all is a bad idea in primary care, but I think there is
some middle ground here where some sensible metrics
might actually improve the way everyone does things..
just my humble opinion from the non-clinical side of
the fence!)
Andrew
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
