David More <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Tim, > > The have totally dropped the ball on this one - to the extent that in > the last few weeks > they have been advertising for 3 pharmacists - not IT experience > necessary - to work on it > for the next 2 years - till June 2009. > > It has not moved forward 1 inch since the MSIA and HL7 (I think) gave it > to NEHTA 3 years ago. Two more years at least I am told!
Doesn't matter if it takes until 2009 to come up with a Really Good National Medications Terminology, but in the meantime let's have the 2004 Good Enough For Now National Medications Terminology released and endorsed as an interim measure. Perpetually delayed benefits while everything is made Nice And Neat and Tidy and Really Good just won't do. Tim C > On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 15:45:21 +1000, Tim Churches wrote: > > Oliver Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> I've been pointed to: > >> > >> http://australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,21848256-15317,00.html > >> > >> E-health standards advance > >> > >> Karen Dearne | June 05, 2007 > >> ... > >> Meanwhile, NEHTA clinical product design manager Kate Ebrill said the > draft medications > terminology for health messaging created by HL7 Australia and the > >> MSIA for the federal Health Department in 2004 (to support basic > clinical > communications) was being further developed as an extension to SNOMED > CT. > >> > >> "A lot of the work we're doing is focused on taking that model and > looking at what is > required to make that sustainable, quality assured and deliverable in > >> Australia," she said. > >> > >> "We're also trying to co-ordinate various inputs around the > Therapeutic Goods > Administration and the PBS." > >> > >> Ms Ebrill said the model was initially intended to provide a > terminology for health > messaging, but "it could also be used in e-prescribing and dispensing > >> applications, as well as shared electronic health records". > >> > >> "We're developing a whole lot of products that will actually support > health messaging, > and terminologies is just one component of that," she said. > >> > > > > Hold on.... "draft medications terminology for health messaging > created by HL7 Australia > and the MSIA for the federal Health Department in 2004"... "being > > further developed as an extension to SNOMED CT. " > > > > So, 3 years later, a national medications terminology is *still* being > developed? A > completely fundamental building-block of clinical communications! I > don't > > have any problem with NEHTA doing further work on a national > medications terminology in > order to integrate it with SNOMED CT, or with NEHTA aligning inputs > > from the TGA and PBS, whatever that means. But is NEHTA saying that > the 2004 medications > terminology was so crappy that it was unusable? Is that the message? > > So crappy that it was better for people to use no medication > terminology for the last > three years, or to just make up their own idiosyncratic medications > > lists and codes. Really? > > > > I think this illustrates a fundamental problem in health informatics - > that some future, > perfect "goal state" continually triumphs over the Good Enough For > > Now. What people need to realise is that there is no Promised Land, > and that health > informatics involves a continuous journey of change and improvement, and > > therefore it makes no sense to delay the deployment of the Good > Enough, now, in > anticipation of the Much Better, at some time in the future. Let's have > Good > > Enough, now, *and* Better, in the future. They are not mutually > exclusive. I've also > observed that software and software deployments are treated like stone > > monuments, carefully built, over-engineered very often, as if they > will have to last for > decades. They won't, it's all fleeting and epheremeral, gals and > > guys, today's cutting edge software is tomorrow's MS-DOS V1.0. So just > get on with it - > sure, keep an eye on the long-term future but don't forget benefits > > to be had in the less-than-perfect-but better-than-no! > > w short- and medium-term future. > > > > Tim C > > _______________________________________________ > > Gpcg_talk mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk > > > > __________ NOD32 2308 (20070604) 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
