Hi Luke Excuse me going slightly to left of the topic but this is a Great case study why $50 million per year for the new The Medicare EFPOS swipe card (MESC) is a gross waste on money. 90% of the GP practices in Lukes division as outlined below can do "Direct online claims" via HIC online right now. 100% could do Gap Billing NOW.
The MESC (read as Mess??) is an additional unnecessary waste of taxpayers money. Exactly the same cost savings the government claims or forecasts the MESC process to save will be achieved at NO cost by simply allowing GAP billing &/or incentives to push up the online patient claiming via HIC online. Do you think they considered that many smaller Banks and EFPOS providers are about to lose lot of medical centres as practices are forced to use the non integrated new Medicare EFPOS swipe card system. The two page article in MO or OZ doc indicates the Government $20 million adverting for this MESC (now STUPID) system is already happening. How often does Mr. Abbott go to tea with NAB or CBA? Besides small banks being shafted by the government, Medical software development resources are being diverted from Helping doctors provide better medical out comes to integrate the helping put $50 million per year into the bank. Medical software development resources has previously diverted to implement HIC online, DVA online, Care plans paper work, Mental Health Care plans paper work- At least the last to had some medical care involved though it is highly debatable if the paper work components are a bureaucratic load of hog wash for some public servant paper fetish. Mr. Abbott proudly spruked less red tape for Doctors recently along with the AMA. When will the Government and perhaps the AMA learn and let doctors help patients medically by keeping off our backs and help patients financially by allowing gap billing? GAP billing is an AMA policy for a long time. Why did they get so contemptuous and into bed with the Medicare office and the Banks. The government claim the MESC system will not cost doctors is a lie. It is costing urgent software development resources which would make medical practice easier and more efficient. It is costing us taxpayers a lot for a system none of us needs. Regards James Bishop Longevity Medical Ph 03 98482009 Fax 03 98407064 Mb 0413582615 Reply to all in case anyone else wants this info. We have an extensive Medical Objects (MO) deployment at our Division and it is very very easy and very very successful. I will provide Luke the detailed info directly to him. Luke please call me on the number below and I will be happy to talk to you and provide additional details. If anyone else wants to talk to me about this they may contact me directly. Quick summary - our experience. o 90% GPs using Broadband o 90% GPs have Medical Objects download capability (pathology, radiology etc ) o 90% GPs with PKI location Certs (also in use of Medicare Australia Online Claiming) o 35% GPs with PKI Individual Certs o QLD Health on board using Medical Objects for Electronic Discharge summaries (EDS)- 1 Hospital operational plus 2 setting up now. Regional and Rural o Private Hospital also sending EDS via Medical Objects to GPs - talking to 2 more private hosp this month o Large number of GPs (have not collated data - most of those with a PKI HCI) are also using MO for GP to Specialist (PKI secured) referrals o Easy to set up, little to no maintenance and free o Nehta compliant for comms and security protocols o PGP or PKI (we prefer and use PKI) o HL7 compliant - no problems o Fully atomic data - limitation is with the medical / clinical software o My experience for 'referral software' also know as 'Trinity' - 2 minutes to install - 6 minutes to train GPs - works with all Medical software (MD / Best Practice / Practix / etc) except Apple Mac software. o 'Download software' also known as 'Magellan' requires no training, works in the background - 2 minutes to install. We/me have no vested interest in the product or company. Just happen to think it is good product and adds value to general practice. I have no problems talking to anyone about our experience with Medical Objects at our Division. I have cc' my CEO and manager to ensure this communication is above board and poses no protocol or bias issues as far as this Division is concerned and that my appraisal and summary is appropriate. Regards Ian Ian Ludowyke General Practice Support IM Co-ordinator Sunshine Coast Division of General Practice 26 Memorial Avenue (PO Box 389) Cotton Tree 4558 Ph 07 5456 8888 Fax 07 5456 8899 <http://www.scdgp.org.au/> www.scdgp.org.au _____ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jared Ebrall Sent: Friday, 27 April 2007 12:01 PM To: Luke Russell; [email protected]; NSW IM&T Officer List; IMIT ADGP LIST Subject: [division-imit] RE: [IMITPolicy] argus vs. Medical Objects Hi Luke In WA we have a large number of Healthlink clients, and more recently, quite a number of Medical Objects sites. I am not quite sure, but I was lead to understand that Argus is not fully HL7 compliant? Jared GP Coastal _____ From: Luke Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 26 April 2007 9:46 AM To: [email protected]; NSW IM&T Officer List; IMIT ADGP LIST Subject: [IMITPolicy] argus vs. Medical Objects hi all, Our division is attempting to get behind one of these two applications to try to standardise our practices. I would greatly appreciate any information on which of these products you are using including any feedback you have received, pre or post implementation. If anyone else wants to talk to me about this they may contact me directly. Quick summary - our experience. o 90% GPs using Broadband o 90% GPs have Medical Objects download capability (pathology, radiology etc ) o 90% GPs with PKI location Certs (also in use of Medicare Australia Online Claiming) o 35% GPs with PKI Individual Certs o QLD Health on board using Medical Objects for Electronic Discharge summaries (EDS)- 1 Hospital operational plus 2 setting up now. Regional and Rural o Private Hospital also sending EDS via Medical Objects to GPs - talking to 2 more private hosp this month o Large number of GPs (have not collated data - most of those with a PKI HCI) are also using MO for GP to Specialist (PKI secured) referrals o Easy to set up, little to no maintenance and free o Nehta compliant for comms and security protocols o PGP or PKI (we prefer and use PKI) o HL7 compliant - no problems o Fully atomic data - limitation is with the medical / clinical software o My experience for 'referral software' also know as 'Trinity' - 2 minutes to install - 6 minutes to train GPs - works with all Medical software (MD / Best Practice / Practix / etc) except Apple Mac software. o 'Download software' also known as 'Magellan' requires no training, works in the background - 2 minutes to install. We/me have no vested interest in the product or company. Just happen to think it is good product and adds value to general practice. I have no problems talking to anyone about our experience with Medical Objects at our Division. I have cc' my CEO and manager to ensure this communication is above board and poses no protocol or bias issues as far as this Division is concerned and that my appraisal and summary is appropriate. Regards Ian Ian Ludowyke General Practice Support IM Co-ordinator Sunshine Coast Division of General Practice 26 Memorial Avenue (PO Box 389) Cotton Tree 4558 Ph 07 5456 8888 Fax 07 5456 8899 <http://www.scdgp.org.au/> www.scdgp.org.au
_______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
