One part of electronic government and our society is the storing and retrieval of medical data. Medical errors cost many lives per year in europe, if the doctors, nurses, pharmacists, fysiotherapists, dentists, ambulance staff and all others involved in the medical work have access to the right information than some of these errors can be prevented.
To give them this information the government is establishing the Electronic Medical Record. what do you think, should every medical staff person get access to your information,?
No, not necessarily to everything already from the viewpoint of efficiency of care. Do you need to analyze someone's complete medical history when you're conducting a routine procedure?
A content filter will become an important element of electronic medical records (EMRs). The mass of content that will build up in time needs to be made accessible. Users need to find the information they require quickly.
What is important and what isn't, might be hard to assess objectively. A constant development of the semantic layer (which the filter is) is required to serve developing insights in the world of medicine.
And to extend your question:
What do you think, should every person get access to all of their information stored in their personal EMR?
Where would a GP write down suspicions he/she has concerning that person, without causing unnecerary alarm, if everybody can read their complete EMR?
The original question also poses an interesting dilemma, concerning psychiatrical problems and gun licenses. Should non-medical professionals (e.g. the police) get access to EMRs and if yes, in what format? And what cases justify such access and which ones don't?
on the last question, considered the well established medical secrecy would prohibit that totally.
Prof. Pekka Ruotsalainen just send me the link of a Finnish eHealth forum and online magazine:
http://ojs.tsv.fi/index.php/stty
Unfortunately it is only partly in English.
