Comments on: Monday Morning Update 3/24/08

By: John

John — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 14:42:58 +0000

About the whole EMR adoption debate – the way I see it is that EMR is just a tool and if it is first a good tool and if used properly in the right application, it will indeed work and provide value.

In speaking with friends who are physicians here in the Boston area I get a wide range of opinions which in the end substantiate my view. One of my friends who works in two different facilities states that in one, the EMR is great and really simplifies his life and helps avoid medical errors. In another institution where he works, the EMR is horribly disconnected from reality and useless.

Thus, I don’t see physicians necessarily adverse to using EMR, but like any of use, they are adverse to using something that just doesn’t make life a little easier.

By: Shar

Shar — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 13:16:55 +0000

Speaking to EMR resistance by physicians: In a recent visit to my dermatologist, as I watched him inputing my information into the large medical group’s Epic EMR system, I chatted a bit with him about the process. I was stunned when he declared that the whole idea of an EMR was “dumb.” He couldn’t find a word more reflective of his advanced education or offer a further explanation to his curt reply? Nope. Talk about not being onboard!!

By: Kellie Wilson

Kellie Wilson — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 21:47:11 +0000

To: LaToya Jackson Re: Walnut Creek. The Epic implementation is definitely not at John Muir. We’re implmenting Cerner for our medical group, and our IPA docs are implementing a variety of systems, primarily NextGen.

By: Dr KillDare

Dr KillDare — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 17:37:41 +0000

Am working at a site that is installing Eclypsis Sunrise Clinical Manager for all of the hospital and ambulatory front end. Apparently they are going to implement version 4 first and then a couple months or so later move to version 5. There are many chicken littles running around saying that SCM cannot serve, as it is planned to do, for a front ambulatory patient scheduling tool and that in version 4, there is no capability to provide automate patient insurance plan eligibility checking. Any idea of places where both of these are implemented and what is the scoop on the relative ease of upgrading to v5? Just trying to get some reality. The project team is committing the classic sin of not communicating widely on the good, the bad and the ugly and what to do about it. Also, a frequently praised HIT consultant from this site was in and completely glossed over the issue.

Me, I plan on saying my peace and avoiding any “I told you so’s” too counter productive but still it looks like a slow rolling disaster of an implementation and probably not the vendor’s fault.

Best

By: The Alchemist

The Alchemist — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 02:15:46 +0000

RE: Riding the UCLA link: Let’s see now; first it was Rush Linbaugh’s pharmaceutical therapy, Dennis Quad’s unfortunate medical misadventure with his infants, George Clooney & company sustains a boo-boo, Britney Spears has a hissy, ad nauseam…

Correct me if I am interpreting our favor regulation incorrectly (HIPPO, I mean HIPPA), but isn’t the Office of Civil Rights suppose to levy fines and threaten incarceration for unlawful actions against the privacy laws of our country’s “protected health information?” It appears to me that “protected” health information is becoming the ex post facto oxymoron for patient medical information; maybe we are all getting our facts confused with “personally identifiable information.”

Let me see again, which is more highly protected – PHI vs. PII? For being a self-proclaimed professional student, I am embarrassingly self-admitted stupid or just severely confused. I personally like the example Mr H sets for being highly cynical across the board.