 |
 |
At 20:50 +0000 on 19-12-1996, Mr. Alan Hyslop wrote: > In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]> > Adrian Midgely replied positively to the suggested modus operandi put > forward under the heading of 'EDIFACT versus Internet' and went on to ask: > > > We would rather like to get away from the handwritten forms as well, so > > if the system could run in reverse... > > Inspires me to ask about another reversal - out-patient booking. Why is > that it's always mooted as something done in direction of Practice to > Trust? Loads of complications to this route, eg type of clinic, urgency, > Consultant preciousness, etc. But what of the other direction? > > "Here's your discharge letter, Mrs Smith, just take it to your GP. We've > made an appointment for you to see her on Thursday at 3pm, which is when > you said you'd be free". > > Good old GPs don't much discrimate with requests for appointments. Take > anything that wanders in etc. So why not make a big stride for continuity > of care by offering Trusts read/write access to your appointments modules? > No reason why it could be done. Infra structural problems to be solved before it can take off: - Good, sound ways of making information available AND to shield off - General way of sending/requesting information. What's needed is a standard in which in a very flexible way Contexts like : Name, adress, Diagnosis, Symptoms, Lab results are defined in a general way. Greetings Gerard Freriks,huisarts, MD C. Sterrenburgstr 54 3151JG Hoek van Holland the Netherlands Telephone: (+31) (0)174-384296/ Fax: -386249 Mobile : (+31) (0)6-54792800 ARS LONGA, VITA BREVIS %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%