Hi all

Andrew wrote:

I am surprised that you do not have more knowledge on this area. An ORU
message can be made to go into Results/letters or documents using
undocumented mechanisms and at times non-standard message types which I
think originated with healthlink (The RSA tab)...


Geoff wrote:

So rather than work with Vendors in complying with the standards with end to
end responsibility you would rather wait and hope to see them comply... but
in the mean time jury rig systems around them based on undocumented and most
likely unsupported mechanisms.

What will the insurers and lawyers say if you relied on back door
undocumented mechanisms and it became unstuck in terms of corrupted, lost
data or patient harm?

Andrew wrote:

It's compliance with standards that is going to fix it, not back room deals.

Geoff wrote:

This isn't about back room deals... it is about an industry working together
hence a Code of Practice that supports standards, compliance and development
of standards over time as the requirements change.

>From the Draft Code of Practice:

"In order to ensure that adequate 'message management' functionality is put
in place, signatories to this Code of Practice will;
. Work closely with the providers of Patient Management Systems (PMS)
integrated with their service to ensure that end-to-end accountability can
be provided.
. Have robust, formal support agreements and protocols in place with those
PMS providers.
. Have in place formal processes for testing their systems with PMS vendors
on an ongoing basis."

There is no mention of financial exchange rather that there is recognition
that there will be different requirements for different players and that
there is accountability in these roles to ensure that the end user has the
best chance of achieving a positive outcome.

Geoff



_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk

Reply via email to