Tuesday, January 10, 2006, 4:19:52 PM, you wrote: dzmn> Greg Twyford wrote:
>> Maybe I'm thick, or I've missed something, but I can't see for the life of me dzmn> how specialists will get interested in messaging with GPs on a widespread basis dzmn> unless they can receive referrals electronically as well. Well its much cheaper, easier and faster to send it electronically. You can also have backward and forward conversations with GPs. I guess it is possible with paper, but a bit drawn out. It avoids phone interruptions and can be done between patients. How often have you played phone tag? We are receiving HESA signed GP referrals now via Medical-Objects (Which was developed by Buderim GE Centre). The in message Signature algorithm is on our Web site. The signature lives with the data, just like a paper signature, so if you have the message you have the signature. dzmn> Specialists aren't interested in receiving referrals electronically and if I dzmn> were a specialist I would prefer the lower transactional costs of a piece of dzmn> paper than an encrypted email that I had to keep for ?7 years. I suspect keeping a 2k message, that you want to keep anyway is a lot cheaper than keeping a piece of paper! Having the referral electronically makes it accessible from anywhere so its a big plus and avoids scanning. Our local specialists report significant savings by using messaging for report delivery. dzmn> I am currently in the early stages of negotiating an ADSL line for one of our dzmn> ophthalmogists. He rightly points out that the benefit of electronic data dzmn> transfer will accrue to me. I will therefore undertake to be responsible for the dzmn> installation and first year's costs for his ADSL account. It's all part of our dzmn> "Adopt a Specialist" program. What about the paper, envelope, stamp and staff time savings? Seems like Robin Hood is now working for the Sheriff to me! >> While MA [Medicare Australia] continue to require signing with one of their dzmn> individual certificates I can't see how replacing HeSA key use in Argus makes dzmn> sense. GPs need their location keys for Medicare Online, and seems to be no problem. Its a bit like giving you staff signed checks. I think for the purposes an individual key makes sense. If the signature is legally binding then it should be individual. For the actual messaging a site certificate is fine to identify message source. dzmn> I think the model is pathology transmission. Doctors usually don't need the dzmn> government to tell them who they are and the rest they can sort out for themselves. >> The myriad approaches to secure messaging seem to ignore this issue, but to dzmn> get most GPs and specialists on-board it seems pretty important to me. dzmn> I hope Argus is listening. dzmn> David dzmn> _______________________________________________ dzmn> Gpcg_talk mailing list dzmn> [email protected] dzmn> http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk -- Best regards, Andrew mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Andrew McIntyre Buderim Gastroenterology Centre (and Medical-Objects) www.buderimgastro.com.au PH: 07 54455055 FAX: 54455047 _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
