MO splits their receivals and sends into 2 programs, therefore it would be correct to say that currently there are 250 GPs who can Receive via MO but cannot Send. Argus does both. For Free. Why should we have to load yet Another program just to send to another MO recipient?
Why not tell GPs in the HUDGP that there are 2 choices of Sending programs available? fee Goswell RN Dip PracMgt FAAPM Practice Nurse Manager Nillo Surgery >-- Original Message -- >Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 09:49:02 +1000 >From: "Chris Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[email protected]> >Subject: [GPCG_TALK] RE: Gpcg_talk Digest, Vol 20, Issue 57 >Reply-To: General Practice Computing Group Talk <[email protected]> > > >Greg, > >You were asking about transmission rates. We have sent 8500 consultation >summaries via MO from our GP After Hours service (GPAAH). We are also >sending from our Allied Health provider (Work Injury Unit). 250 GPs are >installed to date. We will have installed 300 by the end of June. > >Chris. >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Message: 1 >Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 13:44:11 +1000 >From: Jim Glaspole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] RE: [division-imit] RE: [IMITPolicy] argus > vs. MedicalObjects >To: General Practice Computing Group Talk <[email protected]> >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > >Is the Australian clinical messaging marketplace large enough to sustain >Argus and MO? >It looks as though the GP market will be broken up into regional >affiliations, to which I have no strong objection as long as the >products can and do talk to one another. >Jim > >Greg Twyford wrote: >> Ian Ludowyke wrote: >>> Hi Greg Apologies for delay in reply - just now checking my list >>> email. An >>> expression of my busy-ness. >>> >>> Not sure if the close proximity is the reason for success. Not sure >>> if MO support is greater or less for others, suffice to say our >>> experience is a good one and we have developed a relationship with >>> them over time and we do get good support. But if MO are in fact >>> 'looking after their own back yard', well I am happy to take >advantage. >>> >>> The following are valid comments >>> - we were not looking to create something new but rather to plug in >>> to existing infrastructure and technologies - let the experts do >>> their job, we can simply plug in >>> - MO already had established connectivity to over 90% of practices in > >>> our area no need to for us to do any leg work >>> - at the time we made the decision to move our CEO made a clear >>> decision to move forward with Medical Objects as opposed to other >>> providers >>> - they already had partnerships with important stakeholders, >>> including QLD Health, which was good for us for Discharge summary >>> connectivity with public hospitals - We need all solution provider to > >>> continue to develop and build larger pockets of users. This will >>> make them viable, keep them honest, ensure long term evolution and >>> maturity of their products and provide the market with choice and >>> balance. >> >> Ian, >> >> Yep, having 90% of practices in your area with MO capacity is a huge >> advantage, let alone the other reasons that you've outlined. >> >> Chris Scott at Hunter Urban is rolling out MO and is very >> enthusiastic. I'm waiting to here about transmission rates as their >> GPs and specialists start to use it in earnest. >> >> In Chris's case, having an established IT support unit in their >> Division, plus their high commitment and resources for IM&T should >> make it happen pretty easy. >> >> I only wish most of us were as well-resourced. >> >> Greg >> >> Greg >> >> > > >-- >Dr Jim Glaspole Vermont Medical Clinic 529 Mitcham Road Vermont VIC 3133 >(03) 9874 2422 > > >------------------------------ >NOTICE - This message (including any attached files) is intended only for >the use of the addressee named above and may contain privileged and >confidential >information. > >If you are not the intended recipient of this message you must not disseminate, >copy or take any action based upon it. If you received this message in error >please notify the Hunter Urban Division of General Practice immediately (+61 >2 4925 2259). > >Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except >where the sender specifically states them to be the views of the Hunter Urban >Division of General Practice. > > >_______________________________________________ >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
