Australia's health sector has made only "marginal" progress towards being able to exchange information electronically, despite governments investing more than $5 billion in the field over the last 10 years, according to a report released late last week.
Australia's health sector has made only
"marginal" progress towards being able to exchange information electronically, despite governments investing
more than $5 billion
in the field over the last 10 years, according to a
report released late last week.
The primary information
tools used to manage health care in this country still
revolve
around pen, paper and human memory
"At its core, health is a knowledge industry with
information
being central to all aspects of care planning, management
and
delivery," Deloitte wrote. "Despite this, the primary
information
tools used to manage health care in this country still
revolve
around pen, paper and human memory."
Deloitte's findings come on the heels of a similar, but
broader
report released in November
by New South Wales Health special
commissioner Peter Garling. Garling found that while
much of the
work undertaking in NSW public hospitals was "high tech",
its
record-keeping (or e-health) system was a "relic of the
pre-computer age", with most records being kept on paper;
a
situation that had implications for the level of care
provided.
"The relative lack of maturity of information
technology within
the health sector has important implications for patient
safety ...
studies have found that up to 18 per cent of medical
errors are due
to the inadequate availability of patient information,"
wrote
Deloitte.
Deloitte's report recommended the nation embark on a
strategy of
coordination and alignment across government
jurisdictions, focused
in four areas:
Implementing the national "health information
highway" (infrastructure and rules to allow information to
be shared)
Stimulating investment in high-priority IT systems and
associated
tools
Encouraging the health sector to use the tools
Establishing an e-health governance
regime
Many of Australia's current e-health initiatives
involve the
National E-Health Transition Authority (NEHTA), a group
set up
several years ago by state and federal government to
provide
coordination in the area.
What was released is a classic case of bureaucratic 'box-ticking'
E-Health consultant David More
But Deloitte wrote that current governance structures
weren't
sufficient, and NEHTA needed to be replaced with a more
powerful
organisation that could be built upon its existing
structure.
"In NEHTA, Australia has created and invested in a
vehicle for
the progression of the national E-Health agenda and,
whilst the
journey to date has at times been problematic, it
represents the best foundation upon which to
build momentum behind a national E-Health work program,"
the consultancy wrote.
But not everyone agrees that Deloitte's strategy is the
right
way ahead. E-health consultant David More wrote on
his AusHealthIT
blog that there were some very good principles and
strategies to be
found in Deloitte's report, but that in general it would
not result
in action due to a lack of funding.
"Actually, what was released is a classic case of
bureaucratic
'box-ticking'," he wrote. "A country has to have a
published
national e-health strategy — so now we have
one.
"Sad it is a total unfunded fraud on all those who have
been
waiting for some sign of change over the last four years
since the
bureaucrats last decided they would not invest in Health
IT (when
HealthConnect morphed from a real project into a 'change
management
strategy'). Frankly, I don't think the box has been ticked
if you
don't ensure action after planning."