Good evening,
thanks in advance for bearing with a student question (and formatting!):
The following standards are currently listed on tewhatuora.govt.nz; I would not be applying them to develop new systems.
I have been unable to locate superseding standards, I understand there is much work being put into new standards at present. Are these standards below still applicable in the interim, or can anyone direct me to the newer standard/s? Much appreciation for your time.
Status: Current
Please note: This standard is issued with an Interim Status. The standard is to be evaluated in approximately one year upon the completion of a pilot trial in at least one DHB"
HISO 10011 Referrals, status and discharges standards
Please note these are old standards and their use is contained. These standards are no longer updated and should not be used in the development of new systems."
Hi @ErinJB
(@NAHSTIG-council)
You’re absolutely right - these standards were scheduled for not only a review but development of the next phase by the working group a while ago. However a working group and HISO are still navigating when to undertake it as it needs some coordination aimdst the new reforms.
For the time being these standards stand for the interim. A review for Allied Health standards would need to take into account the National Data PLatform, CCDM future thinking, and ultimately the needs of the AHST workforce to deliver improved outcomes for the consumers.
When we constructed these standards the first time round we began with a series of questions about what we would want to know - in order to identify the data required for collection. This thread would be a great space to identify what questions we have now and if they are different to those we had originally.
Do you have questions of your service, workforce or community? (considering that if our AHST data was contributed to the national data platform then it could be integrated and analysed more comprehensively) i.e. what proportion of our regional population with type 1 Diabetes has seen a podiatrist and a dietitian in the last 6 months?
Backing up what Becky says, yes the Allied Health Data Standard (2018) stands for now and HISO is happy to work with the National Allied Health group to refresh the standard in the way she outlines. The old RSD standard on the other hand is effectively withdrawn and remains on the website only as support for maintaining legacy applications that depend on it.
It would be wonderful to know;
people presenting to the hospital system with diabetic foot complications- how many of those had been in contact with a podiatrist in the preceding 12 months. However that would be a data point of entry from the hospital end and not the AHPs end?
From the podiatry side of the fence, last published stats I have seen (2019), only 8% of 430 practicing podiatrists are publicly employed in NZ. I would be confident to estimate at least 50% of our private practising podiatrists would hold PHO Diabetes High Risk Foot Project contracts, where we collect reams of data during annual assessments that is not utilised.
I am thinking about the whole journey of the patient and their contacts with providers regardless of where they receive care.
The National Data Platform was originally conceived as part of the MOH and I was hopeful that it’s long term view was to employ a business model that encompassed any provider of care to be able to contribute standards aligned data in return for access to the greater pool.
For allied health professions we need to push for this and promote data collection, interrogation and outputs from the perspective of the whole patient journey, otherwise we perpetuate silo service delivery - and in particular we limit our ability to design preventative services in response to evidential data.
A provider wanting to know how many patients had seen a podiatrist in the last 12months does not need to be based in an acute facility - they could be a GP or an Occupational Therapist. They would hopefully get this info by requesting the NDP for this information rather than accessing local siloed databases that wouldn’t have the required integrated information.
I agree that AHPs collect significant amounts of under utilised data and it is the core of this information that I believe our phase 2 AHP standard could identify for contribution to the NDP.
Absolutely Becky;
I have enjoyed delving into the Health and Disability System Review 2020 and Allied Health Position Statement 2020 today for my current assignment!
