Parallel Session1 5 Brazil Experience V3
•Télécharger en tant que PPT, PDF•
1 j'aime•425 vues
Presentation at the Parallel Session 1.5 Choosing and using standards for interoperable information systems at the PRINCE MAHIDOL AWARD CONFERENCE 2010, Bangkok, Jan 28-30
![Brazil ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Similaire à Parallel Session1 5 Brazil Experience V3
Similaire à Parallel Session1 5 Brazil Experience V3 (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Parallel Session1 5 Brazil Experience V3
- 1. Parallel Session 1.5 Choosing and using standards for interoperable information systems Beatriz de Faria Leao, MD, PhD Zilics eHealth Convener WG8 Brazilian ISO TC 215 Mirror Committee (ABNT- CEE-IS) Vice-Convener WG8 - ISO TC 215 Health Informatics
- 13. Software Certification Quality Stamp
- 21. Brazilian TeleHealth Strategy Brazil Telehealth Program - remote assistance and permanent education Pilot Project: 9 states and 900 points www.telessaudebrasil.org.br Open University of the Brazilian Unified Health System - provides in-service training for thousands of health care providers www.universidadeabertadosus.org.br Telemedicine University Network - RUTE, initially connecting 57 University Hospitals in collaborative research and education across all federal states - www.rute.rnp.br Source:M Macedo, Jan2010
- 24. System operation should be as simple as the local users
- 26. Examples of Primary Care Units in São Paulo
- 28. SIGA ’s evaluation http:// vitalwaveresearch.com/healthit /
- 29. SIGA evaluation http:// vitalwaveresearch.com/healthit /
- 30. SIGA evaluation
- 32. Health Information Use, Dashboards & Indicators www. datasus . gov . br
Notes de l'éditeur
- current HIS challenges in your country - what standards are needed NOW for what's being done to meet these challenges (and how this compares to what the standards development organizations have prioritized) - what difference an initiative like ROADS would make, in terms of open access to standards, codesets, and implementation guidance Here's some additional information about the session that you may wish to take into account, in preparing to lead your breakout group. Before we hand the session over to the breakout groups, we will provide some common ground by sharing with everyone three mini-cases of standards implementation in countries, where having open access to standards might have meant different outcomes. These mini-cases are:
- On the other hand, the things that are going right - national registries (persons, HC professionals and HC providers) as well as a very nice formatted policy for primary health care, data collected and the health indicators that are nationally used for strategic planning might help. The lab project - difficulties in working and translating vocabularies ( very important issue for non-English speaking countries - how can we help on that? ) - the need for standards but not alone, together with Implementations Manuals, Training and Technical Assistance. I guess then we would note a difference . An example - the identification of subjects of care ISO standard has been customized to our national registry ( we added ethnicity - a demand from the black movement in Brazil) and now the e-government initiative is using it as a basis for all identifications in the country. I guess that helps and avoids duplication of systems. HL7 CDA - although it took a while for the Labs to understand it - is now being implemented by the 6 labs - HL7 Brazil is supporting the initiative and providing technical assistance and training - and this helps to move things forward. I think our difficulties are worth mentioning because perhaps other countries have the same problem and we can thing together in a solution. Thanks again for your input. Beatriz