On Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:17:03 -0000, Adrian Midgley wrote:
>Axiom
>The previous/current administration of the NHS has spent too little on
>IM&T in primary care
Agree.
>Axiom
>Money spent on IM&T in primary care produces health gains directly, and
>indirectly by allowing more efficient and cheaper means of working.
Debatable or difficult to demonstrate ;-)
>Therefore
>Increased investment in IM&T in primary care is required of any PCG
>governing body and will lead to health gains and efficiency savings
Debatable ;-)
>Arithmetic
>What is the payback time of a particular strategy or the introduction
>of a particular IT subsystem?
>
>If the payback time is less than one year the dilemmna does not arise.
>If it is between 1 and 3 years - the current Gov planning scale - the
>decisions are obvious but might feel uncomfortable in the first two
>years.
>If over 5 years it needs a definite central lead.
I'd say 1-3 years. granted. However, the pressure will be on the PCG
governing board (GP-dominant) to answer the question when it arises (as
it will almost certainly arise): hips or IT investment?
Rest my case m'Lud.
Ahmad
________________________________________
Dr Ahmad Risk
http://mednetics.org
home: +44 1273 748198
work: +44 1737 240022
fax: +44 1737 244660
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|