I appreciate that question as well. I think the current stats are that something like roughly two-thirds of family doctors now have an electronic health record. That's a substantial improvement. We're definitely going in the right direction, although we lag behind.
How much money that has saved I think is a little unclear. It may not have saved any money yet, because the entire system isn't completely integrated. For example, as a specialist in a hospital I don't have access to the health records from the family doctors who refer patients to me, so that leads to duplicated tests and delays and that sort of thing, all the stuff you already know.
But I think that's definitely a key piece, not just for the sharing of patient information but for measuring the performance of our system, which is arguably a big part of why some of the countries such as Denmark and even the U.K. have made some of the leaps that they have recently. We rank 10th out of 11 in the Commonwealth Fund in the performance of our health care system. Only the U.S. is worse.