I have been listening in on the end of this debate and finally just had to make comment <s> so apologies if the questions I have have already been addressed.... and also for the fact that I have no clue as to who made which comment in the quotes.... but here goes...
>> > Printed form is interesting. >> >> I was being a bit flipant about the "printed" form comment. <s> I >> would shudder to think we should repeat what they currently do in the >> UK. Just what is wrong with what is happening currently in the UK? From a primary care perspective it has worked fantastically for over 50 years - seriously - and at very minimal cost. It is only now that our secondary & community care colleagues are waking up to the concept of working together that the world is saying that we have problems. (BTW we do.... and can tell you all about them if you really want!) However, until the population started moving around as much as they now do the LLoyd George envelope was the perfect solution. All of the health record for an individiual from cradle to grave was in one place - all members of a Primary Health Care Team knew where it was and how to access it and in a lot of practices it was very well summarised, flagged and annotated which whilst manual... provides the same benefits as such mechanisms in computerised records. BTW - If by current - you mean paper based - the vast majority of GPs are no longer paper based. They have been computerised to a greater or lesser extent for over 20 years and within the next year should be able to share records electronically... which resolves the point that most complain about with regards to UK EHR - which brings me onto my question: Why are we doing this anyway? The example is always given of being in an accident, away from home and your care providers needing access to your record. Well, as somebody who has been in this position I couldn't give *** as to whether they could access my record at the time - I wanted them to concentrate on treating me both when I was conscious and unconscious. All they needed to know was that I am allergic to many antibiotics and am a severe asthmatic. I wear that information around my neck and will continue to do so even if we ever reach such a nirvana as worlwide access to my EHR - because even if we have immediate access to records anywhere the time needed to access them is time better spent treating me! So why are we doing this? Where are the benefits to the patients? To patient outcomes? Now if we are actually about making cost savings rather than health benefits - the argument is different.... Just some thoughts... Nikki
