Horst Herb wrote: > On Tuesday 10 October 2006 08:02, David Guest wrote: > >> Sounds great to me, Horst. How are you authenticating your patients? >> >> David >> > > They can get a user name (= email address on our mail server) and a password > during a consultation AFTER signing a consent form that explains potential > confidentiality risks and their responsibilities. They have to pay $40 for > that time spend explaining them the risks and setting up the user account but > all pay this happily without any negative feedback. > > In the future, we will allow them on a opt-in basis to view their progress > notes (in the new system doctors will be able to veto patient-view for > individual records), their medication, their test results (after they have > been checked and commented on) and reports online > Reports being specialists letters?
> I did run a trial with just a few dozen patients able to view their test > results online along with comments (most of them on warfarin) and they > absolutely loved it! Because they have to log in to see the results we also > get a log that somebody using their auth did actually look at them). Word of > mouth has spread ad now there is hardly a day I don't hear requests for > making this feature available to everybody > Yes. As we've been saying for the last year this is where EHR software should be going. Any chance of you migrating to the EHR that rored? David
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
