The MedInfo conference in Sydney this week may have been an international event but there was bucketloads of Australian news to report, including moves to mandate the sharing of health data with consumers and a flash new national health interoperability plan.
We had a chat to the Australian Digital Health Agency’s chief digital officer Peter O’Halloran about the interoperability plan – which you can download to peruse at your leisure here – and it also formed a big part of ADHA CEO Amanda Cattermole’s presentation with Department of Health and Aged Care digital health head Daniel McCabe at the conclusion of proceedings on Wednesday.
The plan has been in the making for a couple of years now but you get the feeling that with its release, along with the soon to be released catalogue of standards, Australia is finally getting somewhere in the hackneyed rail gauge wars. The catalogue will allow state health departments, vendors and healthcare organisations to check out relevant standards with one click and to copy and paste them into their procurement documents, all with standardised wording, so everyone is on the same page.
The plan has been in the making for a couple of years now but you get the feeling that with its release, along with the soon to be released catalogue of standards, Australia is finally getting somewhere in the hackneyed rail gauge wars. The catalogue will allow state health departments, vendors and healthcare organisations to check out relevant standards with one click and to copy and paste them into their procurement documents, all with standardised wording, so everyone is on the same page.
The plan is more than just a wish list of how the future state should look, however. There are very firm commitments in it, and the agency has taken the step to set up an independent council to oversee progress and report to the public. There is also a very strong vibe in the document that goes beyond just calls to action and hints very seriously at making them requirements.
This is particularly noticeable in priority area three of the plan, concerning information sharing. This includes specifying interoperability in procurements by the agency, health departments and Services Australia, but also suggests consistent legislation across jurisdictions that supports information sharing. This was a theme that Ms Cattermole and Mr McCabe led with in their presentation – mandating the sharing of information.
The M word was first used in the May budget but it was very obvious this week that there will be no hesitation in using legislation as a policy lever, just as Victoria has done. All of the jurisdictions are on board in backing standards and the national plan, as was evidenced at a raucous and hugely entertaining state of the nation panel at MedInfo on Wednesday involving most of the state and territory eHealth departments.
Our report doesn’t do justice to just how far each jurisdiction has come (or how much fun health IT panel sessions can be when competitive instincts kick in). And while South Australia and Tasmania didn’t make the panel, they are both on the same trajectory as the rest of country in their transformation plans. It all bodes extraordinarily well for the coming two years, and thankfully primary care and aged care were not forgotten as they have been in the past.
Progress in interoperability was a big highlight for Pulse+IT, but it was swamped by the huge wave that AI caused at the conference. We wrote recently about the mind-blowing capability of consumer-grade AI like ChatGTP and how it will affect healthcare following our chat to Microsoft’s Simon Kos, and we looked forward to see his presentation in person. There was no chance of even getting into the room, however, as it was so packed that people were literally falling out the door.
Conference co-chairs Martin Seneviratne and Farah Magrabi zoomed in on the zeitgeist in an opinion piece for us this week, which while warning of the safety concerns and pitfalls of AI also urged us to seize the moment and do AI in healthcare properly. AI has been used in healthcare for a couple of decades but we are at a transformational moment and, as Martin and Farah argue, we now need to translate our advantages into a practical infrastructure for trialling and regulating health AI tools.
Australia has helped lead the world in healthcare interoperability – FHIR creator and all-around fabulous person Grahame Grieve (pictured) was a fixture this week – so why can’t we do the same with AI? As the authors argue, we can.
That brings us to our poll question for the week.
Do you support the national health interoperability plan?
Vote here and leave your comments below.
Last week we revealed that ADHA CTO Mal Thatcher was leaving the agency, and asked readers whether the loss of personnel was a concern. 40 per cent said yes, but 60 per cent said no.
We also asked why you voted the way you did. Here’s what you said.
I think we should have more discussion about incorporation of Australian Births, Deaths (and maybe Marriages) Registry data into any National digital health record. Generally there was scarce mention of this at Medinfo23 yet birth and death logically defines the beginning and end of any individual health record. BDM data has been collected by public health agencies for more than a century using non digital methodology and the use of this data for various purposes is familiar and accepted. I believe a lot of BDM agencies still utilise manual processing for items like Certification of the Causes of Death and these processes should be replaced with modern digital processes and strategies. Death Certification is particularly important for various reasons. If it is not recorded promptly and in a readily accessible format some agencies may continue correspondence with the deceased and cause unnecessary distress to relatives. In our community most people die in a hospital. Deaths are certified by a hospital medical officer where this logically constitutes the final entry into an Electronic Medical Record. Many jurisdictions will still require an additional manual process to complete this certification. This should be upgraded as soon as possible in my view. Lastly, death certificates contain data which is important for public health surveillance. Research and data mining (with or without AI) is likely to be more timely, accurate and usable on a digital platform especially if Coronial reports and post Mortem details can also be included when they are available.
Do you support the national health interoperability plan? Readers were pretty rock solid behind it: 97 per cent said yes.
We also asked: If yes, what are its positives? If no, what should have been done differently? Here’s what you said:
– It’s time for complete openness and an end to data blocking in all of its forms
– Sharing of information to integrate the information for the continuum of care for patients
– A clear direction to use HL7 FHIR with AU Core as the future interoperability standard. This should give everyone the confidence to get their systems ready for the future of digital health in Australia.
– Its been needed forever and will solve a bucket load of the issues that everyone gets frustrated over.
– Yes, better patient care, more efficient clinical systems resulting in higher throughputs patients, resulting in more efficient use of resources across healthcare system
– Interoperability will only increase time with patients and reduce the amount of duplication. With duplication comes error. This is not to say it will eliminate errors but will reduce the common errors in health but may well introduce new ones.
– It’s the future we need immediate information at hand for best clinical care
– Mandate
– Overdue.
– At last a view to a national HIE – run and supported by the health sector. Bring it on!
– Data sharing, ease of interfacing, consistent, useable data, etc
– Cost avoidance (resources and time back to clinician and consumers in duplication of documentation and effort), ensure our limited healthcare staff resources are allowed to work at the top of their scope rather than being constantly burdened by administration effort.
– Reduction in duplication of tests, better health outcomes
– Information sharing while maintaining patient confidentiality should lead to better health outcomes for those with chronic or complex conditions.