David More wrote: > Hi Oliver, > > Tim wrote: > >> Only indirectly from Bush. It was ONCHIT (Office of National Co-rod of >> Health IT) within the US Dept of Human Services and Health that called >> for an accreditation body and put up funds for its creation. Thus, the >> US equivalent of NEHTA, but located withing the US equivalent of AGDoHA, >> which caused and funded the formation of CCHIT. > > The link to Bush is quite direct. President Bush set the objective(s) in his > State of the > Union Address - for 3 years in a row - and his Office of Management and > Budget gave funds > to the Department of Human Services to establish the ONCHIT led by David > Brailer (who had > lobbied Bush for the funds and mention in the SotU speech). > > David Brailer was the one who then let the contract to establish the CCHIT.
Um, that seems a bit indirect to me, but I suppose that Presidents don't do anything much directly. But Bush never said 'let there be medical software accreditation", he just said "fix the health IT in the US". > This is the way policy formation works most places. Ideas are had, lobbying > is done, > leaders decide and doers get on with it. The lack of the current federal > leadership and > decision in the issue is why progress here is slower here than in the US and > the UK etc. David, I suspect that you have more faith in politicians and the executive arms of govt than most people who subscribe to this list. And I am not sure progress has been slower here than in the US. About 11% of US family physicians are computerised (in any form) right now, compared to 85-90% of GPs here. Sure, they are way ahead in the UK, but their experience of centrally determined policy backed by billions of pounds of govt spending on health IT hasn't been terrible happy or productive over the last 4 or 5 years. Thus US nor UK are ideal models for Oz to emulate. Better to look to some of the European countries with mixed public- and private-sector health systems like we have here, particularly Holland and Denmark. They are doing much better. Tim C > On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 00:04:12 +1100, Tim Churches wrote: >> Oliver Frank wrote: >>> David More wrote: >>> >>>> The role came from the top..Bush says he want every person to have an EHR >>>> by 2014.. > and there is a US effort to have GPs better automated for that reason >>>> - they realise GP computing is part of the whole picture!. >>>> >> Only indirectly from Bush. It was ONCHIT (Office of National Co-rod of >> Health IT) within > the US Dept of Human Services and Health that called for an >> accreditation body and put up funds for its creation. Thus, the US >> equivalent of NEHTA, > but located withing the US equivalent of AGDoHA, which caused and >> funded the formation of CCHIT. >> >>>> The US Federal Government funded the startup in about 2004/5 - with the >>>> outcome of > having GP, Specialist, Hospital and Comms in the sector being sorted >>>> out over 4-5 years >>>> >>> Tim Churches is gloomy about our federal government doing the same for us. >>> >> Our *current* Federal govt... >> >>> However, what are the chances of some action if all of the medical >>> organisations got > together on this and put a united front to the Minister, making it >>> clear that referring it to NEHTA will not do, unless he specifically >>> directs NEHTA to > devote $Xmillion (or manages to persuade Cabinet to agree to give >>> NEHTA $Xmillion) to make it happen. >>> >> Include health care consumer and other patient groups in this too - they are >> also > stakeholders in a push for software accreditation. Maybe even medical >> defence unions. >> >> Tim C >> >> >> __________ NOD32 2080 (20070225) Information __________ >> >> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. >> http://www.eset.com > _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
