Poor eHealth records can cost lives too

James Riley
Tuesday, 14 July 2009 13:55

IT Policy - Government Tech Policy

Australian Government claims that an Individual Healthcare Identifier (IHI) would reduce avoidable deaths in the healthcare system has been dismissed by privacy advocates, who say poor records management was also a problem in eHealth.

In fact, the Australian Privacy Foundation says there is evidence that poorly implemented eHealth systems can actually increase mortality rates caused by patient mismatching. Federal Health Minister Nicola Roxon yesterday indicated an IHI could reduce such deaths.

APF Health committee chair Juanita Fernando urged authorities to address the governance and management issues related to eHealth before considering the introduction of unique ID numbers.

“We have nothing against saving lives, but it (eHealth) can cost lives too,” Ms Fernando said. “Poorly implemented eHealth systems can cost lives, and that really needs to be recognised.”

“It is quite clear that there are benefits that eHealth can deliver. But there are definite costs too, and they need to be considered openly and questioned.”

The Foundation is deeply concerned that health authorities will not say what information will be attached to the IHI, nor describe the processes for accessing data connected to the number.

There also remains confusion about whether or not a biometric identifier such as fingerprints or facial recognition algorithms will be attached either to the number, or used to access data assigned to the ID number.

“My concern with the discussion paper and the IHI is that health authorities are putting the cart before the horse,” Ms Fernando said. “The Government has confirmed that they won’t have the governance issues in place before the introduction of the IHI.”

A spokesman for Ms Roxon played down the concerns, insisting Government’ initial plans involved only a number – with no data attached to it whatsoever – being put on Medicare cards. Decisions about what data would be attached to the number and how it would be accessed would be made later and only after extensive public consultation.

Individuals would have the option of using the IHI, and would control what data was attached to it, the spokesman said, although the process for opting in or out were still to be decides.

The purpose of the legislative consultation process was narrow – focused only on the introduction of an ID number – and no decision or consideration had been made about such elements as biometric data.