[log in to unmask],Net wrote at 21:22 on 06/12/98
about "Re: RFA5":
-----------------------------
>>The underlying technology needed would be very similar to that which
>>Adrian suggests, but the enquirer would not be dialing in to an
>>individual practice, only to a data holding facility.
>
>The 'health information bank' by any other name. You'd have local bank
>'branches' of course.
But there might be an awful lot of Securicor vans rushing along the
InfoBahn to keep the databank up to date, and most of those updates
would not be accessed before being replaced.
If it is combined with off-site over network securely encryptd
backup of critical summaries then yes, there is merit in this, and
obviously as the large Limited Liability Partnerships turn into the
PCG Firms, there may be some natural centralisation of teh common
records of the patients-in-common.
But for next year I prefer the practice to have a server, which at
present we would not be putting much out from, pending encryption
facilities.
Lets push simultaneously for the RFA5 GP system exports pages on
authenticated demand...
and the RFA5 system has encryption sufficient to pass named pateint
info along an insecure network, whether WAN or LAN.
Because otherwise it will be "after you Peter...no, aftr _you_ Paul"
and nothing done for years.
--- OffRoad 1.9r registered to Adrian Midgley
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|