AMA guidelines- Hmmm? Legally and ethical and logic do not seem to fit in many places Ash.
RACGP sets most GP standards including several privacy related guidelines which are then adopted by accreditation bodies like AGPAL. Many doctors are have great computer "technical literacy". The ones who do not need help. It is unfortunate that the help is not funded or where it is the bruacy scares off many practices. The help and support provided by Divisions is good but not used by many people. Mind you the new AMA president might be able to kick topics like this into shape. It is so good to have the AMA back from being a Yes Minister type toothless extension of the Medicare office. ( where was that ama application form- lol) Regards Mr James Bishop Longevity Medical 8 Jackson Court Doncaster East 3109 Ph 03 98482009 Mobile 0413 582615 Fax 03 98407064 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ash Sent: Monday, 30 July 2007 12:42 PM To: General Practice Computing Group Talk Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] Electronic referrals Andrew McIntyre wrote: > Standard Encryption/signature is not enough and the digitally signed > data must not be encrypted. The format that has been developed embeds > the signature within the HL7 message and this satisfies all the Medicare > requirements. run that by me again ? it is possibly illegal (or at least unethical and forbidden in the ama guidelines for privacy) to send patient data unencrypted i hope that was a typo, 'cos it won't fly in the real world with anyone with a hint of technical literacy ash _______________________________________________ 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
