The Australian Centre for Health Research (ACHR) was set up to stimulate debate within the Australian health sector. We play an advisory role rather than being an executive group. Since our inception e-Health has certainly been on our radar, amidst some scepticism which, I feel, has mostly stemmed from a misunderstanding of what e-Health is all about. It's important not to get confused and think the aim is just to use technology to make life "easier" or "cheaper" for healthcare providers.

So perhaps I should being by clarifying what it means to me.

e-Health is about embracing and utilising electronic methods in order to improve the connectivity, speed and accuracy of communication within the health field. It's about linking GP records, admissions, prescribing, family history, pathology, and the many other branches of our highly complex healthcare system to ensure better outcomes for patients. e-Health practices have much to offer, particularly in the management of chronic diseases.

The ACHR commissioned Michael Georgeff to produce his report, "E-Health and the Transformation of Healthcare", released April 2007, which advocated significant changes and highlighted their potential benefits.

Here is just a short passage from the executive summary report:

"No less than 25% of all Australians suffer from a chronic illness and nearly every one of them would be better off if the medical practitioners who care for, and treat them were more in touch with each other. It is hard to understand how Australians can tolerate the fact that they're not.

This paper sets out the cost - both to the patients and to the nation - of a system in which providers of health care to chronically ill people operate in disconnected silos where one doctor often does not know what another has tested for and prescribed, sometimes even when they are members of the same care team.

The figures for this lack of information-sharing and co-ordination are starkly worrying.

• More than 50% of doctors do not follow best practice guidelines;
• Between 30 and 50% of patients with chronic disease are hospitalised because of inadequate care management
• Fewer than 14% of people with chronic disease are placed on care plans; and
• Less than one per cent of patients are tracked to see if they adhere to care plans."

Those alone are some pretty concerning figures, and if you're interested to learn more, please follow this link to view the full report. Reviewing it left me not just aware of the technological possibilities, but soundly convinced that an eHealth approach is the key to providing better care for patients and the economies of great savings to our health care system.

Following the report, ACHR in cooperation with Global Access Partners (GAP) sponsored a workshop held in Canberra so industry and government could get together to discuss how to go about implementing some of the proposed changes. This proved to be an extremely productive day (see the Workshop Report here), and we are now working towards the GAP Congress on Australia's Health Reform which is due to be held in May 2009.

ACHR has also commissioned Robert Lippiatt to manage a joint project with a number of participants, including MBF and the Department of Veterans Affairs. The state of Tasmania is serving as an experimental case study for developing e-Health practices on the ground. Tasmania has a small enough health system to be manageable as a as a pilot, but it is large enough to show what a difference an e-Health approach can make. 

We have seen real success in increasing the connectivity in that health community, and thereby making some real improvements to the quality of care being delivered.

Since early 2004 ACHR has also been closely involved with the National Consultative Committee on e-Health which was initiated and is coordinated by GAP. This committee is working on turning the talk about e-Health into solid action through practical applications of technology in specialist areas such as oncology and diabetes.

Australia is making progress in the field of e-Health.

However, in my personal view, it seems that more progress has been made overseas. I'd like to see our industry learning more from our colleagues overseas, and likewise our government examining how their regulatory jurisdictions operate. If someone else is already doing something that works, why can't we copy them?  It strikes me we should be trying to buy and then modify complete e-Health bundled systems which have already proved successful overseas, rather than constantly trying to reinvent the wheel.

At the GAP Congress on Regulatory Affairs in September, I put this proposition to one of the Industry figures present. Their reply was that there were two main hurdles. Firstly, that there is a prevailing attitude that we shouldn't be copying our overseas counterparts, rather Australia should come up with our own innovative developments. Secondly, that it is an issue complicated by Federation. That it is hard to have a comprehensive system that will work across state borders and has the capacity to be developed nationally.

If the main difficulties in implementing an e-Health approach are bureaucratic ones, then that is simply not a good enough reason.

The Hon. Neil Batt AO had a substantial career in politics, having been variously Tasmanian Minister for Transport, Education, Economic Development and Forestry and concluding his political career as Tasmanian Deputy Premier and Treasurer. In addition, he was the National President of the Australian Labor Party. He is currently the Executive Director of the Australian Centre for Health Research, a Consultant to Australian Unity and Chairman of Residential Aged Services.