Karsten, you are right, a clinician, in the most countries is obliged to keep an EHR. But the law does mostly not say he must keep it at his own office. So if it is kept at Google or Microsoft, or some smaller PHR provider, I think this is fine according to the law, but still some law-changes may be needed.
The fact that the largest five companies in the world agreed to a common interface/message format and defined dataset must have a good reason. The reason will be that they want to offer a PHR service, and that in compliance with GDPR, because 500 million people live in jurisdiction of GDPR. The tech-companies are getting their part from the multi-billion market, and they are right, according to their capabilities. This agreement is not made to be the next EPIC in line and begging at hospital-doors to implement their software. This service is meant to be transmural in many ways. That in some countries, there will be laws to have copies at clinicians availability can be true, what I wanted to indicate was that it is not necessary for good healthcare, and also not for medico-legal procedures. But reality changes slower then possible, and that may be a good thing also. I think there will not be a PHR service which is to use by clinicians for coming five years, but the pressure is high. It is, in my opinion, the most optimal solution for worldwide interoperability regarding to efficiency, safety and privacy. And it breaks open a new market for appliances which use data from several sources, it empowers the patients (ehhh.... healthcare-consumers). It really brings healthcare to a new level. GDPR is restrictive but also gives chances, it makes more possible then was possible before, but in another way. Bert Op ma 3 sep. 2018 om 13:59 schreef Karsten Hilbert <[email protected] >: > On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 01:08:41PM +0200, Bert Verhees wrote: > > > So, on medico-legal purposes as Ian and Karsten and maybe others referred > > to, a patient, if he maintains his own PHR, and he likes to delete it, he > > can never sue a clinician, because, he, himself, destroyed important > > evidence. > > That is certainly not true, and also not what I intended to say. > > > For that reason, it is for a clinician not necessary to maintain > > data-copies from the patient > > What ? Even sub-legal practice law mandates keeping a record :-) > > I am sure I misunderstand what you are saying. > > > If the clinician needs access to the data, for example, to prepare for a > > visit next day, he can ask the patient to allow access to the PHR the day > > before the visit, but these are al infrastructural details, for which > > solutions can be found. > > Not in the real world today. > > Karsten > -- > GPG 40BE 5B0E C98E 1713 AFA6 5BC0 3BEA AC80 7D4F C89B > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org >
_______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
