Comments interspersed
Jonathan
On 12 Feb 2004, at 9:36, [log in to unmask] wrote:
> Are we not aiming at shared patient care? If GPs and Consultants have
> electronic access to patient records, should they not be able to view
> all
> laboratory work carried out on "their" patient? This would greatly
> reduce
> the need for copies of reports.
I agree totally, ditto for cancer networks, and all other types of
shared care. This is why web technology is so important for us. But the
appropriate amount of "push" is needed.
> There could be still a requirement for those
> attending outside of the local area. However, the "informed Consent"
> aspect
> has been raised. it has been assumed that such information can be
> shared in
> the interst of the medical care of the patient. How many hospitals
> inform
> their patient that their laboratory results are shared amongst a
> number of
> health professionals involved in their care?
I think the big change is that in the future all of this type of
consent will be explicit (and not assumed because of role or
organisational structure) and granular (the patient will control who
can access what parts of the information about them).
PS: I know most patients will take the default options offered to them,
but that doesn't affect their right to have full control.
------ACB discussion List Information--------
This is an open discussion list for the academic and clinical
community working in clinical biochemistry.
Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed
via the internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and
they are responsible for all message content.
ACB Web Site
http://www.acb.org.uk
List Archives
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
|