> -----Original Message----- > From: David Rowed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, 12 January 2006 11:56 PM > To: General Practice Computing Group Talk > Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] Your comments on this quote for discussion > > > Nigel, > > I interpreted Neil Calan's quoted opinion as indicating lack > of perceived > need for inter-organisational sharing in the US rather than > resignation to > accept it. While in Aus we all agree that such sharing is critical to > collaborative care, I'd have to agree that govt purse-strings > would make one > "less than optimistic" where govt is a provider as in discharge > communication. However I believe most of the need to share > info in the > community doesn't involve govt providers ( public hospitals > etc)
Hi David, agreed > and we > should be optimistic that we can ourselves drive this bottom-up Currently NeHTA seems very focused on their gov jurisdictions (i.e. who pays them) so the private will need to jump up and down more if they want the private sector to have any input into decisions. I don't know if the HL7 group has a way to encourage NeHTA to consult with the private sector in a structured way. Currently NeHTA consultation with non-gov providers seems very ad hoc. Any suggestions? Regards Nigel > as is > happening through Argus and GP-secondary-provider > relationships described in > these discussions. We must all identify progressive care > sharers and nurture > them and effectively hyper-nourish them through electronic > referral and > report receipts. > > David.. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dr Nigel Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'General Practice Computing Group Talk'" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 10:52 AM > Subject: RE: [GPCG_TALK] Your comments on this quote for discussion > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: David Rowed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sent: Wednesday, 11 January 2006 3:03 PM > >>To: General Practice Computing Group Talk > >>Cc: HL7 Australasia > >>Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] Your comments on this quote for discussion > > > > > >>George, > > > >>It does not, and will not, apply to Australia and most of the > >>developed > > world. > > > > David, > > Regardless of the quality of HL7 specifications I think the > political > > hurdles (as alluded to in the copied quote below) are the > main block > > that makes the quote writer less than optimistic. > > > > viz. from this list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> You do now :-((( > >> My supervisor next door runs at 640x480. > >> > >> You think GPs are tight, f you want anyone in public > hospital to use > >> your system (which you may not, that's OK) you are looking at > >> - Windows 2000 or NT > >> - 14" CRT 640x480, 800x600 if lucky. > >> - Pentium II 64M RAM > >> etc. > > Ian, > > Another example of why I expect so little from the public health > > system in the whole E-health agenda and another reason why I'm > > sceptical about HealthConnect. The infrastructure catch-up costs in > > NSW public hospitals alone would be horrendous. Who's going to pay? > > That fight could go into the next century. Greg > > -- > > Greg Twyford > > _______________________________________________ > > Gpcg_talk mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.17/227 - Release Date: > > 11/01/2006 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
