*** This is my first post here so my apologies in advance if I seem to be 'recreating the wheel' with my posts. ***
That does raise an interesting point, in an ideal world information should be able to be sent to patients and should be fully encrypted, however my feeling at this point in time it seems that we are not able to get "Doctor -> Doctor" and "Doctor -> Specialist" encryption working efficiently due to a number of factors. If these issues seem to cause a lot of problems with GP's, specialist's etc (Who generally have 1. An IT person/s looking after their IT needs and 2. A good understanding of their software and encryption requirements) I would not like to try to apply these problems to patients who may or may not use said encryption systems again and certainly would not have the understanding of encryption software/keys required to receive the information. I think if a patient requires information electronically it would be sufficient to have this provided on a CD or floppy disk. (I know of at least one specialist that provides this service for ultrasounds). I for one would not like to have these scans/videos emailed to me as the size of the files would make it difficult to work with (especially if the patient uses older dial up connection) Gareth -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Cedric Meyerowitz Sent: Friday, 8 December 2006 08:31 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'General Practice Computing Group Talk' Subject: RE: [GPCG_TALK] Re: [Nat-Div] More questions on Argus The double standard is that it only applies to us sending information to other Dr's. As mentioned in my other reply to you, it excludes data being sent electronically to patient self. Surely if they want us to send encrypted information it should be encrypted no matter to whom we send it. Cedric -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Oliver Frank Sent: Thursday, 7 December 2006 9:36 PM To: General Practice Computing Group Talk Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] Re: [Nat-Div] More questions on Argus Cedric Meyerowitz wrote: > An interesting scenario with IT/IM expectations. A Dr. has to encrypt > patient data being sent to HIC or another Dr. Yet if I send a patient > a copy of a report etc. by E-mail because patient requests it, no > encryption criteria apply. > > Surely this is completely wrong that HIC expects this double standards > ?? Where does the HIC have a double standard about this? Its standard says: "The practice also uses appropriate security (e.g. encryption systems) when patient information and/or clinical data are transferred electronically." This is a single standard. As I have pointed out just now in my message about the patient who asks his or her GP *not* to encrypt the message, its problem is that it leaves undefined what "appropriate" security is in each case. -- Oliver Frank, general practitioner 255 North East Road, Hampstead Gardens, South Australia 5086 Phone 08 8261 1355 Fax 08 8266 5149 Mobile 0407 181 683 _______________________________________________ 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 ********************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential. They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material. You should not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then delete the original message and all copies. We do not accept liability in connection with computer virus, data corruption, delay, interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised amendment. ********************************************************************** _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
