It is an interesting suggestion that practices should only use clinical software that has been approved by AGPAL and is itself- accredited, by a new set of clincial software standards which is being mooted by Drs and Practice Managers.
Suggestions for these new standards for clinical software are: 1. Acknowledgment and Response to users wishes with bug fixes, wish lists, patches and updates - in a timely manner- reflective in a Users Participation Survey 2. Databases which are not size limited, solid and easy to convert to other programs. (so users can change programs easily and still own their database at no cost) Enable flexible GUI alternatives Help desks with 24 hour support and/or Remote problem solving online backups remote encryption but with longterm practice records access long after Dr retires... Practices would naturally only buy software which is accredited, and which will enable the practice itself to be accredited with the new IT standards. A list of accredited programs would be freely available for practices to make their choice, with full costs, pro's and con's. If we are all to become paperless, messaging, billing, EHR then it is only fair that there be accredited software available for practices. Why is software the only thing in a practice which doesnt have to comply to some sort of standard!! Everything else does. What about ISO9000 ? felicity _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
