This appeared a few days ago.
Placing the consumer at the centre of a consolidated health data repository may not be the right approach
- Brett Avery (CIO)
- 28 February, 2013 11:53
The concept of a Personally Controlled Electronic Health Record (PCEHR) might be the correct political tactic to address ethical concerns around the confidentiality, consent and involvement of healthcare providers in accessing electronic health records.
But the decision to place the consumer at the centre of this national health information repository may not prove to be the right approach.
Last month, it was reported that the Federal government’s PCEHR initiative, developed by Australia’s National E-Health Transition Authority (NEHTA) had failed to reach the expected uptake of 500,000 consumers in the first year.
NEHTA’s consumer-driven model is also facing another potential hurdle with US company MMRGlobal’s claim that NEHTA may be infringing on patents issued to its subsidiary MyMedicalRecords.com. See here:
The firm is investigating whether federal and state governments, through NEHTA, have infringed on two patents that cover a method that enables consumers to access health records through their personal account using the PCEHR system.
This begs the question: Has too much emphasis been placed on an individual electronic health record (EHR) rather than a “shared EHR”, which recognises the importance of the relationship between consumers and their healthcare providers in sharing information?
Should a national electronic health record service place the relationship between consumers and healthcare providers at the heart of the data repository – allowing this relationship to govern the consolidation, contribution and protection of health data?
Relationships with our healthcare service providers govern our interactions with healthcare professionals and the level of care they provide us. Establishing meaningful and beneficial relationships between consumers and their healthcare providers is fundamental to the success of healthcare services.
Service providers recognise the health and financial benefits of providing and maintaining long-term and continued care to their clients and consumers want to receive care from providers they trust.
The long-term value of the relationship between healthcare providers and consumers is what encourages information sharing and the quest for better access to better health information.
Information shared between a consumer and healthcare provider belongs to both parties in joint custody – they don’t need to argue about who owns the information when it is disclosed by a consumer or given by the healthcare provider. The information is contributed jointly to benefit of both the consumer and the healthcare provider.
Lots more here:
What an interesting take. As I have been saying for the last few years the NEHRS is a ‘barnacle on a battleship’ in terms of lacking centrality in both a technical and more importantly a patient - provider sense.
Maybe some sanity is emerging?