Getaran.....Degupan Jantung Menghasilkan Tenaga.....?

" Setiap jisim mempunyai tenaga, tenaga itu terhasil daripada getaran, getaran itu menghasilkan bunyi, bunyi itu boleh didengari melalui degupan jantung dan gerakan nadi"

Nasihat Dato' Seri Harusani - Mufti Perak Kepada Kepimpinan Melayu Dulu, Kini dan Masa Depan...

Saya bertanya kepada Dato' Seri Harusani, Mufti Perak semasa Seminar Kepimpinan Melayu baru-baru ini, soalan saya kepada beliau berbunyi..."Kepimpinan semua negara islam pada hari ini kelihatan begitu lesu, kaku dan tidak bertenaga, kita berpecah dan tidak bersatu, walaupun negara islam kaya dengan hasil bumi seperti minyak tetapi kita miskin kerana ia tidak tahu pengurusan hasil bumi kita sendiri, semua fenomena ini berlaku kerana jiwa, tubuh dan pemikiran kita telah dirosakan oleh yahudi zionis. Persoalannya bagaimana caranya kita orang islam boleh melepaskan diri kita daripada belenggu Yahudi Zionis...?"

Beliau menjawab ringkas..."kita kena kembali kepada rukun iman dan rukun islam, itulah asas kita, kita kena faham, menghayati dan melaksanakan semua tuntutan dan kehendak rukun iman dan rukun islam, jika kita dapat menghayati dan mengamalkan semua kehendak rukun iman dan rukun islam, Insyaallah kita akan selamat daripada belenggu Yahudi Zionis". Beliau juga menyeru semua pemimpin melayu kembali kepada kehendak dan tuntutan rukun iman dan rukun islam untuk menjadi pemimpin melayu yang boleh membawa perubahan yang lebih baik kepada bangsa melayu kerana kekuatan bangsa melayu terletak kepada Islam.

Seminar Kepimpinan Melayu Anjuran InQKa, UiTM,Tajaan Sime Darby & UMW

Semalam dan hari ini saya menghadiri Seminar Kepimpinan Melayu di Sime Darby Convention Centre, Bukit Kiara anjuran InQKa. Saya menghadiri seminar tersebut di atas kapasiti saya sebagai Pegawai Pembangunan Pelajar NR (PPPNR). Sebanyak 4 kertas utama telah dibentangkan oleh cendikiawan, ulamak dan tokoh ekonomi manakala sebanyak 31 kertas kerja dibentangkan secara selari di dua bilik seminar yang berbeza selama 2 hari. Semua kertas kerja ini membicarakan dan mewacanakan soal kepimpinan melayu dulu, kini dan masa depan, semasa sesi penutup oleh Prof. Madya Dr. Shireen Haron, Penolong Naib Canselor, Institut Kualiti dan Pengembangan Ilmu (InQKA), UiTM mewakili Dato' Seri Naib Canselor membentangkan resolusi yang telah diputuskan oleh para ahli akademik di Malaysia dan Indonesia, ulamak, cendiakawan, NGO, Prowaris, Parti Politik dan lain-lain badan lagi yang mengambil bahagian dalam seminar tersebut.

Diantara resolusi tersebut ialah menuntut supaya kepimpinan melayu samada daripada Barisan Nasional atau Pakatan Rakyat untuk mempertahankan Sistem Raja Berpelembagaan sediada, Memahami, menghayati dan mendaulatkan Perlembagaan Persekutuan (undang-undang), menstruktur semula sistem pendidikan negara daripada peringkat rendah, menengah dan pengajian tinggi supaya menghasilkan rakyat yang memahami dan menghayati nilai sejarah dan rukun negara, mengamalkan budaya ilmu dalam kehidupan, memperkasakan diri dengan memahami, menghayati dan mengamalkan rukun iman dan rukun islam sebagai cara hidup.

Saya tertarik dengan kertas kerja utama yang dibentangkan oleh Prof. Dr. Nik Anuar Nik Mahmod mengenai usaha-usaha golongan tertentu yang cuba memutarbelitkan fakta sejarah dan diakhir pembentangan, beliau mempamirkan slide ungkapan kata-kata Tuan Guru Abdullah Fahim, ahli falak, ulamak dan juga datuk kepada Perdana Menteri Malaysia yang kita kasihi. Katanya "SEDARLAH, BERKERJALAH, BERGIATLAH, JANGAN DAKAP TUBUH SAHAJA, KALAU MASIH LAGI DENGAN KEADAAN-KEADAAN SEPERTI MASA LALU ITU, SAYA BERKEYAKINAN PENUH AKAN TENGGELAM SEKALI LAGI, TETAPI KALAU SEKIRANYA TENGGELAM PADA KALI YANG AKAN DATANG ITU, MAKA BANGSA MELAYU TIDAK AKAN TIMBUL DAN BANGUN MELAINKAN SUDAH KIAMAT, YANG MANA DUNIA TIDAK ADA LAGI MELAINKAN TUHAN YANG MAHA KUASA SAHAJA"

Saya tertanya-tanya apakah maksud "keadaan-keadaan seperti masa lalu itu" yang dimaksudkan oleh Kiai Abdullah Fahim. Soalan tersebut tidak sempat saya lontarkan kepada Prof. Dr. Nik Anuar kerana masa terlalu mencemburui saya dan saya terus tertanya-tanya sehingga disaat saya menulis post ini. Saya ingin mengucapkan syabas dan tahniah kepada InQKA kerana berjaya menganjurkan seminar tersebut dan seminar itu memberikan kesan yang mendalam kepada saya sebagai orang melayu.

What is Interoperability?

“Ability of two or more systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged.”

(Source: IEEE Standard Computer Dictionary: A Compilation of IEEE Standard Computer Glossaries, IEEE, 1990)

Top Ten Mistakes in IT Decisions On Health Infomatic System..

1. Not Using a Structured Process - Many organizations plunge head first without a clear and structured plan.
   
2. Not Defining Needs Beforehand - The best way to determine which solution will work best for your organization is to identify your needs. To avoid overlooking important functionality, you may find it helpful to start with a good list of requirements.
3. Hiring a Consultant who is Really a Reseller - Many consulting firms not only provide help selecting computer systems, they also act as re-sellers and implementers of enterprise applications. You may not be exposed to all possible vendor solutions, just the ones with whom your consulting firm has an affiliation.
   
4. Paying Too Much Attention to Bells and Whistles - Innovative new product features may seem cutting edge and exciting don’t let it distract you. Concentrate on functionality you will use every day. Most sales reps are adept at dazzling you with fancy features.
   
5. Not Including Key Users in Selection Process - Do not select a solution without soliciting meaningful input from the users. At the beginning of your selection project, form a selection team with representatives from all affected departments. One of the biggest frustrations users face in selection decisions is being sidestepped by the IT department.
   
6. Buying More Than You Need - Without a clearly defined list of user requirements, you’ll tend to buy more functionality than you actually need. Select a system that allows for growth and enhancements--if and when you need them.
   
7. Allowing Vendors to Drive the Process - Vendors are highly skilled at showing you what they want to show you and answering questions the way they want to answer them. To level the playing field, you need a clearly designed and defined selection process that will ensure you receive responses in a standardized format.
   
8. Allowing the “Powers That Be”to Choose the System
9. Confusing the Salesperson with the Product
10. Not Using an RFP Process

Improving quality through effective implementation of information technology in healthcare

In 2003, two Stockholm hospitals 40 km apart merged to form the one Karolinksa University Hospital. Interviewees reported that there was a need to form a common EMR to increase integration and allow communication between the two sites, and, ultimately, other services.

Three independent appraisal studies were carried out. The reports were made to one session of heads of department: interviewees describe a ‘defining moment’ when the chief medical officer asked for a ‘show of hands’ from the group about which system should be adopted, and nearly all voted for one system. The meeting recommended that all departments at one site (Solna) would move from five different types of medical records to the one system used by the other site, and this was accepted by top management.

The new system would need to be installed in 40 clinics with 7000 users at the Solna site. Some new hardware had to be installed, as well as considerable changes to software. The new system contained patient administration, clinical medical records and referral- and replies to referral information, but it was not an entirely paperless record: there were still many documents such as EKG and ‘pictures’ (e.g. radiology).

Analysis of documents and interviews show four key choices, which were confronted and made before implementation, all related to making the key main change within 1 year using limited internal implementation capacity, and delaying other changes to later phases. The first choice was about the extent to which top-level management and the IT department should prescribe the system and its details, and how much and what type of independence the departments should have.

The preparation process involved the departments, and top leadership made the timetable and managed the project tightly, but departments could choose at what time during the year they would implement and some of the details of the screens which would be created by the hospital IT department.

The second key issue was whether to use an outside implementation service or use the limited in-house resources for implementation. The solution was to manage the project internally, phase-in the change over time, and to use external consultants for specific changed which needed to be made. This was possible because of a third choice and decision, which was not to attempt to implement computer physician order entry (CPOE) to order medications at the same time but to phase this in after the EMR and in the following year.

The disadvantage was that some departments would loose CPOE, which was functional in the current system. The fourth choice was not to implement functions which different departments needed for research during the EMR phase, but to modify the EMR in the second year to allow this.

Project process to introduce the EMR

Once the decision was made in 2004 about which system to introduce, interviewees reported that senior leadership made it clear that departments only had choice about small screen modifications and their date for implementation in 2005. Each department was required to nominate staff internally to form a department project group to work with the information technology department to fine-tune the system for the department and carry out implementation. During 2005, all clinics had the same interventions from the project members and the plan was almost exactly followed.

Effects of the system on personnel and work

An analysis of the interviews carried out half way through implementation (June, 2005) through to 3 months after implementation (March, 2006) identified common themes that are listed below and illustrated with typical quotes from informants. Approximately 95% of the comments were positive about the implementation process and the new system.

The relatively successful Karolinska implementation could be due to:

1. Consultation before implementation
2. Consensus about a need for the system and which system was best
3. Prioritzation and ‘driving’ by management team
4. Competent IT project leader and team
5. Tested, user-friendly and intuitive system needing little training
6. Potential for development of the system
   
7. Medication order entry not difficult to integrate after implementation
   

The evidence from this and other research is that an EMR designed to meet many different needs often does not meet local clinical work needs, is more difficult to implement, and can reduce productivity and access to information critical for patient care and safety.

A new system will need to have benefits which significantly outweigh these disadvantages and which are clearly communicated, if it is perceived to be less user-friendly and requires extra time for operation, which is often reported to be the case in previous research. Time and resources will be needed to develop the system.

Practical implications

In this study, the comparison with other research suggests general lessons for others implementing an EMR system in a hospital:

1. Choose a system which allows a range of needs to be met and is a tried and tested in a similar setting,
2. The overriding choice criteria should be a system that works for clinical personnel and saves time. Resistance is not always irrational. If personnel do not think it is easy to use and will save time then implementation will be significantly more difficult and possibly impossible.
3. The system should be intuitive, requiring little or no training,
4. The system should be easy to modify and develop, within limits, for different departments and uses.
5. The decision about the system should be participatory, but once made, implementation should be directed and driven.
6. Balance local control of selection, implementation and clinical participation with meeting higher-level requirements.
7. Involve each level in different ways, with clear and appropriate parameters about which decisions can be made locally and which require higher-level decision about common standards.
8. Assess and address the presence and absence of prior and concurrent factors, which have been repeatedly shown in research to help and hinder implementation.

Conclusions

Health services do not have a good history of cost effective implementation IT and especially of EMRs. The potential for increasing safety and productivity of this ‘quality intervention’ is largely unrealized. The study of EMR implementation presented in this paper was carried out using the same case study method of an implementation in the USA. After reviewing previous research, the research team expected the EMR planning and implementation in this study would follow the same problematic pattern of other implementation.

The findings of the research team, who were entirely independent from the hospital, were unexpected and contrary to most previously reported research: the Karolinska implementation was successful, on time and within budget.

Empirical data of respondent’s perception of what helped and hindered implementation show a consensus about the main ‘helping’ factors. These were the local hospital control of selection of the system, employee involvement in many different ways, leadership and support by a competent on site information technology department, and decisive and full leadership backing.

The Karolinska experience suggests that a tried and tested EMR, which is accepted by physicians can be implemented successfully in 1 year into a teaching hospital with some experience of computerization. It did not show whether such a system allowed the clinical work and process redesign, which some thought necessary and as a missed opportunity during the implementation

Other findings about what helped and hindered were derived by comparing interviewee data to a simple implementation theory developed from a review of previous research. The findings from this revealed the importance of organizational, leadership and cultural factors, as well as a user-friendly EMR, which assists clinical work, is easily modified and which saves time and increases productivity.

This theoretical model for successful implementation is based on a review of research and supported by the evidence of this study. It provides a theoretical basis for future research and a practical tool for implementing an EMR and realizing the potential of this method for improving safety and the quality of patient care.

(Source: International Journal for Quality in Health Care; Volume 19, Number 5: pp. 259–266, 23 August 2007)

Knowledge and Perception of the Staff of Pandan Hospital Regarding Total Hospital Information System

Pandan Hospital was the third hospital using Total Hospital Information System (THIS) in Malaysia after Selayang and Putrajaya Hospital. This 704 bedded hospital is located about 15 kilometers from the center of Johor Bahru City, It will be the first hospital in the southern using THIS.

THIS is designed to automate the care delivery process in hospital through the process of integrated clinical, imaging, financial and administrative system. A study of knowledge and perception regarding THIS among the staff posted to Pandan Hospital was held.

The objective of the study is to determine the knowledge and perception of the staff of Pandan Hospital regarding THIS. A total of 131 respondents with 55.7% of the respondents were staff nurse. Less than 50% of the respondents requested to work in this hospital.

Among those who requested, almost 60% said that they were interested with IT hospital. Almost 90% of the respondents had minimal computer knowledge and 96. % was very interested or interested with Information Technology (IT). Most of the respondents had superficial knowledge about THIS by saying that THIS was about computer and linkage, IT and paperless hospital.

The perceptions toward THIS were good, where 58% said it was a better, systematic and quality system, 16% said modern and advance and 5.3% said that the system had both good and bad effect. Majority of the respondent said that THIS would benefit to both patients and staff.

Interoperability challenges with imaging systems in John Paul II Hospital, Krakow, Poland

Among the main lessons learned during digital imaging implementation and system integration at John Paul II Hospital in Krakow, Poland, were interoperability issues. According to Zbigniew Les from the hospital, “only with closely integrated ICT systems throughout the hospital, the full imageenabled medical electronic patient record can become reality”. However, while extending the ICT network within the hospital and interconnecting it with the systems of other institutions, the hospital faced interoperability problems. Due to a lack of interoperability, John Paul II Hospital cannot take full advantage of the technology in place to extend its usage outside the campus.

On the one hand, “there are still too many versions of software that are not compatible within the sector causing difficulty to exchange data”, Mr. Les said. A lack of state regulation is a further reason: “The process of system integration within the hospital and with other institutions, for example the National Health Fund, is hampered by a lack of clear state regulation about electronic data storage and exchange as well as a lack of standards for exchanging medical information.” Consequently, beside technical solutions, “the involvement of policy makers is equally important to bring clarity and impose some common solutions for the healthcare sector”.

Currently, large institutions with competitive advantage such as John Paul II Hospital impose their solutions to others, Mr Les explained. This may lead to several competitive standards. Their coexistence may result in unnecessary complications for the users and may make the creation of interoperable solutions at the national level more difficult.

Source: European Commission, Enterprise and Industry DG (2007b), p. 116.

ICT standards consolidation to overcome interoperability problems

Standards are key to interoperability because they provide the specifications which are necessary for systems to communicate meaningfully with each other. From the perspective of the buyers and users of healthcare ICT – for example general practitioners or ICT managers in hospitals, community care centres and insurance funds – interoperability problems may arise because of various shortcomings of e-health standards and standardisation.

These may include a large number of conflicting standards on the one hand but too few or insufficiently developed standards for particular solutions on the other hand. From an ICT industry perspective, there is a lack of sufficiently specified and commonly used ICT standards that meet user needs.

Consequently, a solution for the ICT interoperability challenge in the health sector may be the common use of a more confined number of well-developed and harmonised standards. This may in short be considered as “standards consolidation”. Standards consolidation is easily stated as an objective but difficult to realise. Numerous standardisation organisations, governments, and enterprises with diverging interests are struggling to maintain or gain power in defining ICT standards for the health sector. The number of standards used and the number of organisations involved in defining standards is very high and almost impossible to overview.

The complexity of the area of ICT standardisation itself is an important barrier to reach the objective of standards consolidation and even to decide where and how best to tackle it. Structuring the area of e-health standardisation and thus reducing this complexity is a key objective of standardization.

Healthcare Interoperability: the big debate!

Are international standards the most important factor in healthcare interoperability?A reader poll ahead of the Healthcare Interoperability conference in Birmingham decided that they were. But what would expert debaters and their audience think on the day? Fiona Barr reports.

Are international standards the key to long-lasting success in healthcare interoperability - or are they sometimes doing more harm than good? That, essentially, was the question posed by those speaking in the debate at E-Health Insider’s Healthcare Interoperability conference in Birmingham.

For the motion

Paul Woolman, ehealth information architect in the ehealth directorate of the Scottish Government, proposed the motion that: “This House believes that international standards are the most important factor in achieving interoperability in healthcare.”

He argued that interoperability is not only about achieving the technical transfer of data, but also about ensuring that the clinical meaning is understood. To get that to work, successful international standards are essential, he said. “You can do things with local solutions but to do things that last for a long time you need international standards,” he added.

His view was backed up by Philip Scott, a board member of HL7 and head of IT projects and development for Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust.

Scott argued that standards were not a bar to life in the real world and standards such as those used in debit cards were proof that international standards could work. “Standards have to be international because vendors are operating in a global market,” he said.

And against

The case against the motion was put forward by Martin Strange, head of health IT at Lloyds Pharmacy. Strange said he believed that some standards were “the greatest impediment” to interoperability and that open, national standards were much more important. He said these could retain flexibility while delivering functionality and: “We need that flexibility.”

Strange was backed by Ian Herbert, an independent health informatician and vice-chair of the British Computer Society’s Health Informatics Forum.

Herbert argued that international standards are not developed in a coherent manner and not always developed by the most appropriate people to do the job. He also said features that were relevant to the US were not always relevant in the UK - and vice versa – while international standards were difficult to change and complex to maintain.

“What actually matters is reliable and consistent use of standards, and international standards don’t make this any easier,” he said.

Open for debate

The four debaters were questioned about the commercial impact of different standards on suppliers who want to market their software worldwide.

Woolman said there was evidence from the medical devices market of big companies being willing to work together on standards to try and defer some of the costs - which could then benefit smaller suppliers.

But Herbert argued that while international companies liked to work to international standards this could also be a bar to innovation among smaller companies. He said that, for example, the cost of getting products tested by NHS Connecting for Health, the agency that runs the National Programme for IT in the NHS, could be prohibitive. “Some of these complex standards are actually doing some harm as well as good,” he said.

Dr Mary Hawking, a GP in Bedfordshire, asked whether international standards should be introduced for information itself, given that healthcare interoperability was all about moving patient data around.

Scott responded that clinical practice differed across the globe and that achievement would have to be limited to some sort of summary, highlighting the proposals for a European health record summary.

Others in the audience suggested that introducing standards for clinical content was critical before anything else was tackled. The newly-published standards developed by the Royal College of Physicians were welcomed as a good first step. “Unless we address the clinical content we have nothing to convey,” one doctor said.

Summing up for those supporting the motion, Woolman said national standards were never going to be enough. “Medicine is an international business. Companies work internationally. They want to use international standards. International standards have to be used in the long term,” he said. However, the motion was lost by just one vote.

(Source : http://www.ehealtheurope.net)

Why Healthcare IT Projects “Go Bad”?

Dr. David More MB, PhD, has an excellent summary of the reasons why healthcare IT projects "go bad." It is clear this is an international phenomenon unrelated to the type of healthcare system (e.g., socialized vs. private sector model), and that the root causes are similar.

The reasons cited by Dr. More from his blog are as follows (emphases on the key phrases are mine):

1. Many believe a key point is that managerial and organisational instability is a major cause of failure. I agree this is really important and, indeed, when one reflects on the Public Health Sector it is really a relative rarity to have an Area Health Service CEO or CIO serve out their full five year contract. This flux is due, in part at least, to a combination of Government and Ministerial changes, changing policy priorities, some being perhaps promoted beyond their capabilities and the unexpected events that precipitate management change. Conducting any significant project in the absence of continuing stable senior management support is a recipe of disaster.

2. Especially in the public sector, there is often a disconnect between the managerial responsibility placed on a project manager and the freedom to act they are accorded. At times this leads to the “wrong” staff being retained in roles for which they are no longer suited, to the detriment of the project as a whole. The disconnect (and budget inflexibility) also often leads to difficulty in attracting and retaining suitably skilled staff as well as excessive delay in staff acquisition. The other problem that is almost universally encountered in Hospital projects in my experience is the “drip feed” of funds and the difficulties in getting suppliers paid. More than once I have seen competent project managers just resign in disgust when they realise they have neither the spending authority, money or the staff to deliver the project they are required to make happen.

3. Because executive health-care management are often uncomfortable regarding many aspects of Health IT, frequently associated with a fairly limited understanding of what is required, at an executive level, for project success, the quality of project sponsorship and support is less than is needed. Senior executives, like everyone else, prefer to stay within their “comfort zone” and, if the Health IT project is not within that zone, real difficulties are almost inevitable. The project manager has a difficult responsibility to carry the project sponsor along on the journey, and to make it clear what they must do for the project to be a success on their watch!

4. Clinicians inevitably see a new system as a very low priority in their “caring for their patients” activities. This will lead to all sorts of difficulties with change management, training and effective use of a new system, unless both executive management are fully committed and real “clinician” evangelists and enthusiasts are recruited to work with their peers.

5. Involvement of all relevant categories of clinicians in the selection and later configuration of systems is crucial. The clinicians really have to be confident the system will work for them and be convinced of its value and utility or the project will be at extreme risk before it even starts.

6. There is a real tendency to underestimate the complexity of and the effort required to implement say a new laboratory or patient management system – to say nothing of clinician facing systems such as Computerised Physician Order Entry or Computerised Nursing Documentation which involve virtually all key staff changing the way they work. Careful planning and an really adequate emphasis on education and change management are vital as is developing real clinician ownership of the project.

7. It is clear that all organisations need to develop organisational competence and teamwork with Health IT. I think the best way to do this is to choose one or two easily “doable” projects and get them done on time and within budget. Only once this capability is proven should an organisation try the larger and more complex implementations. Success, as they say, builds on success.

8. It is clear that when implementing systems in hospitals size really does matter. It is a relatively straightforward process to put basic systems in a 100 bed regional hospital in 3-6 months with very little difficulty. The 1000 bed tertiary teaching referral hospital is a horse of a totally different colour. The budget is likely to be in the millions, the complexity of what is needed much higher and the work practices more entrenched. All this means both risk and duration are much higher. Additionally these organisations cannot be fed a ‘one size fits all’ solution. The systems that are deployed must not only be flexible but be flexibly implemented in consultation with ALL involved.

9. It is vital to work hard to develop an open and frank relationship between the system vendor and the organisation which is implementing the new system. No contract will prevent a disaster but work on ensuring a constructive, frank and balanced relationship will make a huge difference.

I feel this is well said. Healthcare organizations should take heed of these observations.

(Reference : http://aushealthit.blogspot.com)

who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power of our democracy? Tonight is your answer!

OBAMA: Hello, Chicago.If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible, who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer.

It’s the answer told by lines that stretched around schools and churches in numbers this nation has never seen, by people who waited three hours and four hours, many for the first time in their lives, because they believed that this time must be different, that their voices could be that difference.

.

It’s the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled. Americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of red states and blue states.

We are, and always will be, the United States of America.

It’s the answer that led those who’ve been told for so long by so many to be cynical and fearful and doubtful about what we can achieve to put their hands on the arc of history and bend it once more toward the hope of a better day.

It’s been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what we did on this date in this election at this defining moment change has come to America.

A little bit earlier this evening, I received an extraordinarily gracious call from Senator McCain. Senator McCain fought long and hard in this campaign. And he’s fought even longer and harder for the country that he loves. He has endured sacrifices for America that most of us cannot begin to imagine. We are better off for the service rendered by this brave and selfless leader.

I congratulate him; I congratulate Governor Palin for all that they’ve achieved. And I look forward to working with them to renew this nation’s promise in the months ahead.

I want to thank my partner in this journey, a man who campaigned from his heart, and spoke for the men and women he grew up with on the streets of Scranton ... and rode with on the train home to Delaware, the vice president-elect of the United States, Joe Biden.

And I would not be standing here tonight without the unyielding support of my best friend for the last 16 years ... the rock of our family, the love of my life, the nation’s next first lady ... Michelle Obama.

Sasha and Malia ... I love you both more than you can imagine.

And you have earned the new puppy that’s coming with us ...to the new White House. And while she’s no longer with us, I know my grandmother’s watching, along with the family that made me who I am. I miss them tonight. I know that my debt to them is beyond measure.

To my sister Maya, my sister Alma, all my other brothers and sisters, thank you so much for all the support that you’ve given me. I am grateful to them.

And to my campaign manager, David Plouffe ... the unsung hero of this campaign, who built the best — the best political campaign, I think, in the history of the United States of America. To my chief strategist David Axelrod ... who’s been a partner with me every step of the way. To the best campaign team ever assembled in the history of politics ... you made this happen, and I am forever grateful for what you’ve sacrificed to get it done.

But above all, I will never forget who this victory truly belongs to. It belongs to you. It belongs to you.

I was never the likeliest candidate for this office. We didn’t start with much money or many endorsements.

Our campaign was not hatched in the halls of Washington. It began in the backyards of Des Moines and the living rooms of Concord and the front porches of Charleston. It was built by working men and women who dug into what little savings they had to give $5 and $10 and $20 to the cause.

It grew strength from the young people who rejected the myth of their generation’s apathy ... who left their homes and their families for jobs that offered little pay and less sleep.

It drew strength from the not-so-young people who braved the bitter cold and scorching heat to knock on doors of perfect strangers, and from the millions of Americans who volunteered and organized and proved that more than two centuries later a government of the people, by the people, and for the people has not perished from the Earth.

This is your victory.

And I know you didn’t do this just to win an election. And I know you didn’t do it for me. You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime — two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century.

Even as we stand here tonight, we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan to risk their lives for us.

There are mothers and fathers who will lie awake after the children fall asleep and wonder how they’ll make the mortgage or pay their doctors’ bills or save enough for their child’s college education.

There’s new energy to harness, new jobs to be created, new schools to build, and threats to meet, alliances to repair.

The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even in one term. But, America, I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there.

I promise you, we as a people will get there.

AUDIENCE: Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can!

OBAMA: There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won’t agree with every decision or policy I make as president. And we know the government can’t solve every problem.But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And, above all, I will ask you to join in the work of remaking this nation, the only way it’s been done in America for 221 years — block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand.

What began 21 months ago in the depths of winter cannot end on this autumn night.This victory alone is not the change we seek. It is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were.

It can’t happen without you, without a new spirit of service, a new spirit of sacrifice.So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism, of responsibility, where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves but each other.

Let us remember that, if this financial crisis taught us anything, it’s that we cannot have a thriving Wall Street while Main Street suffers.

In this country, we rise or fall as one nation, as one people. Let’s resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long.Let’s remember that it was a man from this state who first carried the banner of the Republican Party to the White House, a party founded on the values of self-reliance and individual liberty and national unity.

Those are values that we all share. And while the Democratic Party has won a great victory tonight, we do so with a measure of humility and determination to heal the divides that have held back our progress.

As Lincoln said to a nation far more divided than ours, we are not enemies but friends. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.

And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn, I may not have won your vote tonight, but I hear your voices. I need your help. And I will be your president, too.

And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces, to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of the world, our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand.

To those — to those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security: We support you.

And to all those who have wondered if America’s beacon still burns as bright: Tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope.

That’s the true genius of America: that America can change. Our union can be perfected. What we’ve already achieved gives us hope for what we can and must achieve tomorrow. This election had many firsts and many stories that will be told for generations. But one that’s on my mind tonight’s about a woman who cast her ballot in Atlanta. She’s a lot like the millions of others who stood in line to make their voice heard in this election except for one thing: Ann Nixon Cooper is 106 years old.

She was born just a generation past slavery; a time when there were no cars on the road or planes in the sky; when someone like her couldn’t vote for two reasons — because she was a woman and because of the color of her skin.

And tonight, I think about all that she’s seen throughout her century in America — the heartache and the hope; the struggle and the progress; the times we were told that we can’t, and the people who pressed on with that American creed: Yes we can.

At a time when women’s voices were silenced and their hopes dismissed, she lived to see them stand up and speak out and reach for the ballot. Yes we can.

When there was despair in the dust bowl and depression across the land, she saw a nation conquer fear itself with a New Deal, new jobs, a new sense of common purpose. Yes we can.

AUDIENCE: Yes we can.

OBAMA: When the bombs fell on our harbor and tyranny threatened the world, she was there to witness a generation rise to greatness and a democracy was saved. Yes we can.

AUDIENCE: Yes we can.

OBAMA: She was there for the buses in Montgomery, the hoses in Birmingham, a bridge in Selma, and a preacher from Atlanta who told a people that We Shall Overcome. Yes we can.

AUDIENCE: Yes we can.

OBAMA: A man touched down on the moon, a wall came down in Berlin, a world was connected by our own science and imagination. And this year, in this election, she touched her finger to a screen, and cast her vote, because after 106 years in America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours, she knows how America can change.Yes we can.

AUDIENCE: Yes we can.

OBAMA: America, we have come so far. We have seen so much. But there is so much more to do. So tonight, let us ask ourselves — if our children should live to see the next century; if my daughters should be so lucky to live as long as Ann Nixon Cooper, what change will they see? What progress will we have made?

This is our chance to answer that call. This is our moment. This is our time, to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids; to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the American dream and reaffirm that fundamental truth, that, out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope. And where we are met with cynicism and doubts and those who tell us that we can’t, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people: Yes, we can.

Thank you. God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.

£12bn NHS computer system crashes at the first attempt

THE rollout of a new computer system to every London hospital has been frozen after being installed in just one organisation. IT experts have stopped setting up the software across the capital and have rushed to sort out problems caused by the system at the Royal Free Hampstead NHS trust the only acute hospital to have installed it so far.

It is the latest blow for the £12billion national programme, designed to give doctors access to patients' records wherever they are in the country. The system has been beset with software glitches and design faults. One internal health service document said it could put seriously ill patients at risk of being inaccurately diagnosed.

According to the document, it is routinely crashing, intermittently losing patient information, and some staff are reverting to pen and paper. There have already been reports that implementation of the system nationwide has virtually ground to a halt. The project is already four years late. So far the Royal Free is the only trust to have installed the latest "London Configuration 1" software.

It links to the NHS "spine" that stores patient information. To protect patient confidentiality users must swipe an electronic card to access the data. Kay Fletcher, spokeswoman for the London Programme for IT, which is responsible for the upgrade of NHS computers, said: "We want to learn from the issues at the Royal Free before rolling it out."

Ms Fletcher admitted no more hospitals would get the upgrade until next year. Four trusts Kingston, Queen Mary's Roehampton, St George's in Tooting, and Imperial Healthcare in west London, were expected to be next in line for the new system.

Ms Fletcher said: "The trusts are continuing with their preparations but we are discussing revised golive dates. We have Christmas coming up and we wouldn't want a trust to go live at that time and January is also very busy."

A spokeswoman for the Royal Free said: "Although the implementation initially went better than we expected, there are some problems with the system. As a result, a programme was set up in early October with the local service provider, BT; the London Programme for Information Technology; and the system supplier, Cerner UK, to address these issues."

Source: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard

Aktiviti Akademik UiTM Sesi Dis 2008 - Mei 2009

	AKTIVITI	TARIKH	TEMPOH
1	Pra-Pendaftaran Kursus – Pelajar	24/10-10/11/08	18 hari
2	Konsolidasi/Analisis Data Pra Pendaftaran – PSMB	11/11/08	1 hari
3	Penyediaan jadual waktu kuliah (ICReSS) – Jawatankuasa Jadual Waktu (JJW)	12/11-16/12/08	34 hari
4	Keputusan Peperiksaan OKTOBER 2008 diumumkan	18/12/08
5	Jana kursus-kursus ‘outstanding’ – PSMB	19/12/08	1 hari
6	Konsolidasi/Analisis Data untuk pengemaskinian jadual waktu kuliah – PSMB	20/12/08	1 hari
7	Pengemaskinian jadual waktu kuliah - JJW	21-22/12/08	2 hari
8	Pendaftaran kursus online e-PJJ	20/12/08 – 21/1/09	32 hari
9	Pendaftaran kursus semi-automatik pelajar lama clear-cut – KP/AR/EO (Pilot Screen – EC dan AC)	21-22/12/08	2 hari
10	Pendaftaran Pelajar IPSis	13/12/08	-
11	Pendaftaran Pelajar PLK (lama)	22/12/08	-
12	Pendaftaran kursus secara online (termasuk tambah dan gugur kursus) – Pelajar	23/12/08 - 25/1/09	34 hari
13	Penjanaan bil akhir (selepas selesai add/drop) pelajar ePJJ	22/1/09	1 hari
14	Pembayaran yuran pelajar ePJJ	23-31/01/09	8 hari
15	Penjanaan bil yuran pelajar PLK/SML	26-27/1/09	2 hari
16	Pembayaran yuran pelajar PLK/SML	29/1 – 9/2/09	7 hari
17	Pengesahan pendaftaran kursus - Pelajar	27/1 – 9/2/09	14 hari
18	Pendaftaran pelajar baru lepasan SPM/STPM/ Matrikulasi	20-22/12/08	3 hari
19	Penjanaan Pelan Pengajian Pelajar Baru lepasan SPM/STPM/Matrikulasi – PSMB	21-24/12/08	4 malam
20	Pendaftaran Semi-Automatik Pelajar Baru lepasan SPM/STPM/ Matrikulasi– KP/AR/OE	26-31/12/08	4 hari
21	Pendaftaran pelajar baru lepasan diploma	27/12/08	2 hari
22	Penjanaan Pelan Pengajian Pelajar Baru lepasan diploma – PSMB	27-28/12/08	2 malam
23	Kemaskini Bahagian Semasa Pelajar Baru Lepasan Diploma – KP/AR/EO	29-31/12/08	3 hari
24	Kuliah	30/12/08 – 25/1/09	4 minggu
25	Kemaskini Pengecualian Kredit (PC) dalam sistem	2-16/1/09	14 hari
26	Pengesahan (Validasi) Pendaftaran Kursus	27/1 -9/2/09	2 minggu
28	Cuti Pertengahan Semester	26/1 – 1/2/09	1 minggu
29	Kuliah	2/2 – 12/4/09	10 minggu
30	Cuti Ulangkaji	13-19/4/09	1 minggu
31	Peperiksaan Akhir	20/4 – 10/5/09	21 hari
32	Cuti Semester	11/5 - 5/7/09	7 minggu
33	Pendaftaran Intersesi secara Online	11/3 – 11/5/09	9 minggu
34	Kuliah Intersesi	18/5 – 19/6/09	5 minggu
35	Keputusan Peperiksaan APRIL 2009 diumumkan	5/6/09	-
36	Pendaftaran Peperiksaan Khas secara Online	6 – 15/6/09	10 hari
27	Peperiksaan Intersesi dan Peperiksaan Khas	22-24/6/09	3 hari