The Australian Medical Association Limited and state AMA entities comply with the Privacy Act 1988. Please refer to the AMA Privacy Policy to understand our commitment to you and information on how we store and protect your data.

×

Search

×
04 Jul 2016

Doctors and other health workers need to have access to core clinical information in electronic medical records if the Federal Government’s My Health Record system is to deliver an improvement in patient care, the AMA has said.

Releasing the AMA’s updated Position Statement, Shared Electronic Medical Records 2016, AMA President Dr Michael Gannon said that giving patients the ability to block or modify access to critical information such as medications, allergies, discharge summaries, diagnostic test results, blood pressure and advance care plans compromised the clinical usefulness of shared electronic medical records loaded on the My Health Record system.

“Doctors treating a patient need to be confident that they have access to all relevant information,” Dr Gannon said. “Shared electronic medical records have the potential to deliver huge benefits by giving health workers ready access to critical patient information when it is needed, reducing the chances of adverse or unwarranted treatments and improving the coordination of care.”

“But, if patients are able to control access to core clinical information in their electronic medical record, doctors cannot rely on it.

“Giving patients such control, as the My Health Record system does, is a big handicap to the clinical usefulness of shared electronic medical records.”

The Federal Government launched My Health Record earlier this year to replace Labor’s troubled Personally Controlled Electronic Health Record (PCEHR) system, and doctors and other health care providers will not be able to view records created as part of a trial of My Health Record’s opt-out arrangements until mid-July.

The system, like the PCEHR, gives patients the power to control what goes on the health record, and who can view it.

The AMA said giving patients such control meant the My Health Record would never realise the full benefits of a national electronic health record system.

“All shared electronic health records must include core clinical information that is not subject to patient controls,” the AMA Position Statement said. “Certainty that shared electronic health records contain predictable core clinical information which is not affected, conditioned or qualified by the application of access controls, is critical to the achievement of the legislated objectives of the My Health Record.”

An AMA survey of 658 medical practices, undertaken last month, found many GPs were reluctant to use the system, partly because of a lack of confidence in the reliability of information it contained.

Dr Gannon said the AMA encouraged individuals to take responsibility for their health and strongly supported the idea of a national shared health summary system, but it had to be fit for purpose.

The AMA added that in ‘break glass’ emergency situations, implied consent must sometimes be assumed to allow access to the full medical record.

The Association said the system should also provide protections for doctors who acted in good faith but missed or were unable to locate critical data “because it is buried in a sea of electronic documents”.

The AMA Position Statement on Shared Electronic Medical Records 2016 can be found here https://ama.com.au/position-statement/shared-electronic-medical-records-revised-2016

Adrian Rollins

 

 

 

 

 


Published: 04 Jul 2016