On Thursday, 19 July 2018 11:01:23 AEST Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote: > I agree [that the fundamental reasons for centralised medical records are > cost savings and better health care]. My Health Record isn't one of them, > its a summary system that required significant GP effort to input and > interpret data. > > It increases inefficiencies and data fragmentation. Fundamentally myhr is a > very bad idea.
I thoroughly agree. The ability to quickly access *critical* medical information in an emergency when the patient isn't able to communicate it is important, but that doesn't require anything like MyHR. Patient history rapidly loses value because an individual's medical status can change very quickly. Doctors will not rely on previous scans, X-rays, pathology results, etc. unless they're very recent. The most common MyHR use-case would probably involve doctors spending clerical time updating an individual's MyHR record over decades instead of attending to patients, only to have it largely ignored. A normal hospital admission will involve documentation from an attending GP or Specialist which is guaranteed to be up to date, relevant, and complete. Given the large number of government agencies which will be empowered to access MyHR, including the police, the border-control conglomerate, CentreLink, and the ATO, it's pretty clear MyHR has little to do with health and much more with CONTROL. DavidL. _______________________________________________ Link mailing list Link@mailman.anu.edu.au http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
