ICMCC

The Electronic Health Record is globally accepted as a necessity [1]:

• to better meet patient expectations,
• to expedite many tedious work processes such as prescription writing and creation of chart notes, service administration, research, planning and audit, communication between patients and providers, fiscal governance
• to create new ways in which the health of our patients can be improved
• to improve cost efficiency due to raising demands of healthcare and the aging population
• Portability - travel, second opinions, emigration, working abroad, distant working and support for developing countries and as part of aid, war, famine and assistance to refugees While professional experience with the EHR is generally positive, there are even more opportunities for improving care with the EHR once patients have access to their own records.

Evidence-based benefits include:

• Improving the relationship between clinician and patient
• Improving trust between patient and clinician
• Practical support for patients in managing their health
• Improving compliance
• Patients feel empowered to make decisions about their health?
• More efficient use of consulting time

The Record Access Collaborative is being developed as a service to the public, patients, health services and industry. The aim is to bring together those across the world who have an interest in seeing record access more widely available and maximising benefits that flow from it and to be instrumental in managing practical and technical aspects concerning patient record access in relation to local/national policies.
Read more on the goals of the RAC.

RAC Newsletter December 2007

Brian Fisher, December 2007

RAC Newsletter July 2007

Brian Fisher, July 2007

RAC Contribution by Denis Protti

Denis Protti, June 2007

RAC Newsletter March 2007

Brian Fisher, March 2007

Fast. Forward. Finland. – Setting the eHealth benchmark

“There are 21 hospital districts for specialized care in Finland, of which – let’s keep it simple - 100% are using Electronic Medical Record Systems. The saturation point was in 2003 when 90% of the hospitals had adopted EMR solutions, while the 50% mark had been passed back in 1999.”
Article
HealthTech Wire, 8 May 2008

Should You Trust Your Health Records to Google and Microsoft?

“Imagine being able to check your medical history as easily as you can your e-mail. Or being able to provide records to a new doctor at a moment’s notice. Google, Microsoft, and others are developing promising systems for storing digital health care records–for free.”
Article
Erik Larkin, Washington Post, 26 April 2008

New BC health law could lead to privacy abuse

“Legislation paving the way for the collection and sharing of electronic health records will lead to potential patient privacy breaches, say groups opposed to the Bill which will soon get second reading in the B.C. legislature.”
Article
Pamela Fayerman, The Vancouver Sun, 23 April 2008

Ending Secrecy: Physician Makes Case for Full Disclosure of Health Records

“My first exposure to the “for doctors’ eyes only” concept of the medical record occurred in high school, when I was working in a community hospital, and a patient waiting for a diagnostic exam began thumbing through the hospital chart that was placed at the bedside. To inform me about this breach in protocol, a staff member approached me and said, “Do you normally let patients in the holding area read their own charts?”
Article
Ted Eytan, iHealtBeat, 16 April 2008

The coming surveillance of our health records by the government

“There’s a long-standing belief that one of the guiding principles of medicine is that our medical records are confidential, and that our health matters are not disclosed to anyone other than ourselves, another physician who is consulting or taking over our care, a person we specifically give permission to see our record and - in the case of certain infectious diseases - the local health department, if it’s mandated by law.”
Article
Thorswitch, TeamSugar, 13 April 2008

NHS Alliance urges full record access for patients

“The NHS Alliance is calling for patients to have electronic access to their full primary care record as part of its manifesto for a 21st century health service.
The organisation, whose membership includes GP practices and PCTs, has published its proposals for reform of the health service in a new report, In Sickness and In Health, intended to inform Lord Darzi’s NHS Review.”
Article
e-Health Insider Primary Care, 14 April 2008

A Conversation With Neil Sofian, MSPH About Social Networking and Patient Portals

“Neil’s a believer in the power of social networking, and has extensive experience applying social networking tools to different patient populations, as well as in corporate health applications. In the discussion of next generation of patient self-management tools, I think we both agree that this is a trend to be nurtured and brought closer into our health systems.”
Article
Ted Eytan, 11 April 2008

Online records pit your privacy against a doctor’s need to know

“Does a doctor treating you for a broken leg need to know you had an abortion 20 years ago?
Should your dentist have access to information about your visit to a psychiatrist?
Such questions are moving center stage as patients’ medical records increasingly are transferred from manila folders to the Internet, allowing easier access to medical history that the patient may not want known.
In one of the latest examples of the debate over how much patient history doctors should have access to, Dr. Marc Overhage, chief executive of Indiana Health Information Exchange, cast the lone dissenting vote as a 17-member federal panel recommended that patients get more control over electronic health records.”
Article
Daniel Lee, Hattiesburg American, 8 April 2008

Medical records are not so private

“There is good and bad about electronic records,” says Robert Gellman, a District-based privacy consultant. “There is a lot of promise about medicine going to electronic records. Those who are promoting it talk about its appeal to consumers. But the principal beneficiaries are the health care organization, research facilities and insurance companies.”
Once the information is in the hands of those large companies, its final destination is limitless. That is because institutions such as law enforcement, life insurance companies and researchers are not covered under the federal government’s Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).
Article
Karen Goldberg Goff, The Washington Times, 7 April 2008

First ICMCC Event sessions announced

See the ICMCC Event website for a first overview of event sessions.