Grant:
> There is no problem with the hardware, software, comms, etc, all are
> there for the taking, and the concept of the web page based EHR is
> now 9 months old for me, and 2 years old for many others. What
> isn't there is the understanding to support the move away from a
> tangible record. It's that touchy, feely thing again on which most
> humans depend, and which we will have to revolve around for some
> time yet
And the will to make the shift of thinking (there is only one touchy
feely thing I depend upon, but I take the point!).
> Rest assured, though, because if the transfer of EHRs in
> GP takes as long from the theoretical stage to implementation as
> EDIFACT messaging has done, then a web browser-type record will be
> the only logical way to go.
But we are still 'developing' edifact as a lot of people said on this
subject: "edifact is not perfect, but,....)
I will probably rest assured when the dinasaurs are finally burried
and I can see moves towards a different kind of evolution.
It is so easy to say: it ain't perfect but that's all we got. Or: we
can't evolve because IMG, Government, Computer Systems suppliers
etc.etc. say we can't do so. Why? Just because.
reminds me of a sticker on the screen between the public and civil
servants at the British Consulate in Barbados. It said: we have no
reason for it, it's just our policy (!).
Ahmad
---------------------------------------------
Dr Ahmad Risk
Gestation: The Medical NetNoire >;->
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|