Advertising


News

Patients given immediate access to results on MHR


Michelle Wisbey


3/05/2024 3:51:36 PM

The DoHAC has scrapped a seven-day delay in patients viewing pathology and diagnostic imaging results, against the advice of medical colleges.

Worried woman looking at laptop.
The My Health Record changes were one recommendation of the Strengthening Medicare Taskforce.

Patients will be able to access certain test results immediately and without the supervision or oversight of their doctor, following a change to My Health Record (MHR) access rules.
 
The Department of Health and Aged Care (DoHAC) has confirmed patients will no longer have to wait seven days before they can see their pathology and diagnostic imaging reports.
 
It says this change will give both patients and their doctors better access to information, empower patients to participate in their own healthcare, and reduce duplication.
 
While there will still be a delay in some circumstances, such as where there is evidence of clinical safety or other risks, the decision overrides serious concerns from the RACGP and other medical groups about the potential risks of making results immediately available to patients.
 
‘Maintaining the seven-day rule allows consumers to have access to their health information, albeit with a small delay that allows their GP or other clinician to discuss their results with them,’ the college said in a submission last year.
 
‘We do not consider the benefit of real-time access to results outweighs the potential harm of consumers misinterpreting results or receiving unfortunate results with no immediate clinical support.’
 
Dr Emil Djakic,a member of the RACGP Expert Committee – Funding and Health System Reform, told newsGP the changes mean medical information could reach patients in a way that cannot be contextualised by their GP.
 
‘Some patients are very literate and will be more than happy to look, some patients will not even bother looking at it, and there’ll be a few that will look at it and probably see some pretty scary outcomes,’ he said.
 
‘Some of the language in these reports does create quite a lot of anxiety without a level of health literacy, so that is concern.
 
‘It comes with a responsibility, and that is the responsibility of the patient who, on viewing that data, has to accept what they’re seeing is something they’re reading without any assistance or interpretation.’
 
The changes were one of the recommendations of the Strengthening Medicare Taskforce, which also called for public and private pathology and diagnostic imaging providers to share their reports to MHR by default.
 
However, Dr Djakic said the lack of a seven-day access delay means some patients could see their results and choose not to follow-up with their healthcare provider.
 
‘They will choose to interpret it themselves because it avoids a visit to the doctor, or a phone call, or a consult – there are all sorts of reasons that the consumer might choose to say, “that’s adequate for me”,’ he said.
 
‘We need to be making sure it’s somehow reflected in My Health Record that this consumer has viewed the data and if they don’t proceed with engaging with the appropriate clinician, to help steer them through that data.’
 
Currently, 99% of GPs are registered and using MHR, with the service seeing a 24% increase in people using it to view their pathology reports in the past 13 months.
 
The volume of pathology and diagnostic imaging reports uploaded is also in the rise, with both up around one third in just one year.
 
As the popularity of MHR continues to grow and as patients demand more digitised and modernised access to their healthcare records, Dr Djakic said GPs must adapt.
 
‘In health system reform, we’re clearly keen to see data move more easily and make the patient the centre of their healthcare, and this is a step to that,’ he said.
 
‘We’re seeing these sorts of adaptions every day, and our industry is in the midst of seeing what this means, how it works, and how we continue to serve the patient with the best possible care with this information.
 
‘We’re in this reform space where we’re looking at how do we how to manage this in a way that meets the patient’s needs as safely, and with as much care and quality as required.’
 
To accommodate the access changes, the Australian Digital Health Agency will soon begin helping healthcare providers to meet the new requirements.
 
Log in below to join the conversation.


digital health imaging My Health Record pathology


newsGP weekly poll Do you think the Federal Government’s expansion of Distribution Priority Areas will make it harder to recruit GPs to regional and remote Australia?
 
71%
 
10%
 
18%
Related






newsGP weekly poll Do you think the Federal Government’s expansion of Distribution Priority Areas will make it harder to recruit GPs to regional and remote Australia?

Advertising

Advertising


Login to comment

Dr Nicole Lewindon   4/05/2024 7:22:57 AM

This is actually brilliant for us. We will have no more obligation to follow up abnormal results because the patient can see that there’s an abnormal one and should follow it up themselves. Any other responsibility for results will fall on the pathology/ radiology provider to mark the result as “ abnormal - suggest you follow up with your doctor “. Tbh this already what happens in most countries anyway.


Dr Adeel Ashraf Chaudhry   4/05/2024 7:39:28 AM

I'm glad this has finally happened. Immediate access to results is something that is available even in undeveloped countries. It is likely going to improve patient understanding and satisfaction. Yes, there will be new issues and concerns. We need to perhaps give it time to see how this plays out rather than oppose it outright.


Dr Susan Juliana Fernandes   4/05/2024 8:37:34 AM

A patient of my colleague , came in once asking why the practice had not called her in about her results which were indicated in red. She had viewed them on Her MyGov website.The tests results were essentially normal. Just highlighting the problems we will face if patients get the results before we do.


Dr Monica Ann Armillei   4/05/2024 3:56:34 PM

I had a patient ring me having a panic attack from a CT scan organised by a specialist and the report was sent to her phone. I did not have it sent to me. So she read it out to me. It took at least half an hour to explain the four major findings which could have each been cancer but also could have been something else and to calm her down enough to let her go after booking an actual appointment to talk some more. She didn’t ring the Specialist. She had only met him once but has known me 20 years. I had to apologise to all the booked patients whose appointments were delayed that day. Who is responsible for this mess?


Dr Lynette Dorothy Allen   4/05/2024 4:16:10 PM

Another issue with immediate access is that the reports are not always right !


A.Prof Christopher David Hogan   4/05/2024 5:46:02 PM

The pathology results are only a small part of the clinical picture & there are times when a normal test alone is not reassuring.
I remember an incident during my training. The surgical registrar was running really late. He rushed in & told his patient "I just got your results back. You have form of cancer we should be able to treat. I don't have time now but I will discuss it in detail first thing tomorrow" & ran off.
Patient got dressed , discharged himself, went home & hanged himself.
We all learnt from that mistake.
Must the government force us to repeat it?


A.Prof Christopher David Hogan   4/05/2024 5:58:28 PM

* The Feds do not understand what General Practitioner do.
* They assume that patients have adequate Health Literacy to understand the significance or lack of significance of investigations.
* The last objective measure showed that only a fraction of the community had adequate Health Literacy , not enough for most people to even understand Dr Google.
* Doctors will need to write adequate clinical details referring patients for tests
* Pathologists will need to write more detailed reports


Dr Ailsa Mary Carole Laidlaw   5/05/2024 8:12:37 AM

Immediate access has been available in the USA for years. It has many advantages, such as for timing of IVF medications.
In Australia, it may have several benefits, such as allowing a patient to consider a result before a planned consultation.
It would seem that the disadvantaged are being exaggerated and the benefits minimised, perhaps by clinicians who don't want to give up control.