In message <[log in to unmask]>, Donovan Ross
<[log in to unmask]> writes
>
>I have been very interested to see other members of GP-UK's comments on
>computerisation. I dabble in computing and use a Psion and the Internet
>regularly. However, I am surprised at how little I know compared to
>contributors to this list. I agree with other colleagues who say they
>disappointed with computerisation in general practice.
>
>I don't see that knowledge of computer technology should enter the
>discussion. The idea, discussion, argument is the important factor.
>"What can computing achieve?" seems to be the question. Unless primary
>care practitioners are there to put useful data in to the equation the
>results will be questionable.
Isn't this part of the problem - useful to whom?
As far as I can see, the rapid increase in GP computerisation in 1990/91
was driven almost entirely by changes in the Red Book imposed by the
"New Contract", such as targets instead of IOS for cervical cytology and
childhood immunisations, leading to the need to identify patients who
had not received a service. If the list was large, it was very difficult
to maximise income *without* a computer.. ;-<< - and - doesn't RFA
reflect the administrative imperative?
Mary
PS Why restrict useful input to primary care? Has anyone detected any
useful secondary care input? and what will a *secondary care* EPR look
like.. ?
>Don Ross
>Library House Surgery
>Avondale Road
>Chorley
>Lancs
>PR7 2AD Phone: 01257 262081
Mary Hawking Kingsbury Court Surgery Church Street Dunstable LU5 4RS
tel:01582 663218 (surgery)fax:01582 476488 (surgery)
Member of British Healthcare Internet Association
Dunstable and Houghton Regis Locality Commisssioning Pilot
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|