90 likes | 330 Views
PCIM 14 November 2012. GP2GP Where are we now?. Andre Bredenkamp Manager, eContinuum of Care. GP2GP Looking Back. 2006 some form of electronic patient notes transfer identified as a need June 2007 Kicked off as a project under the auspices of HISAC, Nov 2009 target to commence rollout
E N D
PCIM 14 November 2012 GP2GP Where are we now? Andre Bredenkamp Manager, eContinuum of Care
GP2GP Looking Back • 2006 some form of electronic patient notes transfer identified as a need • June 2007 Kicked off as a project under the auspices of HISAC, Nov 2009 target to commence rollout • Jan 2009 transferred to the Ministry, Key Directions • Mar 2010 Patients First (QI4GP) engaged, project transferred from Ministry June 2010. • Nov 2011 deployed by My Practice and Houston, March 2012 deployed by Medtech and available in IntraHealth V7 release. • Business Case Benefits 2007 • Reduce errors by reducing the potential for incorrect data entry of a person’s clinical record or the record (or parts) not being entered at all • Remove a barrier for a person choosing to change their provider • Improve utilisation of administration time away from duplication of effort to value add activity • Financial benefits, opportunity rather than hard cash. Approx 300,000 transfers per annum, average 30 mins per transfer. Equates to an equivalent savings of $1,350,000 per annum.
Where are we now Status at a glance
GP2GP, issues… • Issues still evident • Data Quality/consistency, spaces in user defined codes breaks import • File Size constraints • Request process too complicated. EDI and Medical Council lookup inconvenient • No central directory of participants • Inconsistent use of Medical Council number between vendors • Babelfish error messages not friendly • File transferred to non-participating practice cannot be opened or viewed.
…GP2GPIssues • Issues addressed • Ack (Acknowledgement) message not getting through • Attached file types, some formats failing transfer • Directory of providers, to be addressed by new HPI service • Under some circumstances a partial file transfer might be appropriate and should be identified as such.
GP2GP promotion • What message/action is needed to improve adoption rates • Active support/stories from a few GPs who are not quite so technical • Requirement for Medical Council number to be dropped • Possible single “In box” at each practice • Agree mechanism for electronic request, RSD proposed • Promote new version release up-take on the back of the “B” Code requirement
GP2GP Improvements • Improvements tabled for discussion • Toolkit as a service • Error handling in messages • Administration users rather than GP’s process records • Electronic request should include Toolkit version to ensure compatibility • Additional screening terms should be added • Provision for a “Cover note”
Challenges • Challenges • Change control • Toolkit V1 incompatible with Toolkit V2. Toolkit as a service could resolve this. • GP2GP V2 needs to be backwards compatible with GP2GP V1 • Data Cleansing • Use toolkit to strip spaces from message, and re-insert on import. • Data cleansing strategy • Governance • How does the sector take responsibility for the upkeep of GP2GP • Funding • Cost neutral funding for GP2GP enhancements and maintenance • Who is the beneficiary, should they fund • Price setting by vendors only possible if all vendors agree
Questions and Suggestions • What is needed in GP2GP V2, how do we get there? • Where to next for the Babelfish (Toolkit) • ???