Comments on: HIStalk Interviews Loran Hauck

By: Trevor

Trevor — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 23:30:26 +0000

The best thing about this story is the way clinicians are driving the changes and adaptations.
The little side-note about ‘intellectual property’ gives a clue. When a supplier (Cerner) works with a group of users who donate many hours of their time and expertise to develop a new product, who stands to gain from the sales of v2?
Many previous attempts to do CPOE have failed, either because they’ve been driven without dominant clinician input, or because the employer (service provider) has not thought far enough ahead. Intellectual content (thinking) is what makes some hospitals better than others.

By: Impressed

Impressed — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 01:59:22 +0000

“not tired of suzy rn” – me thinks that you have the same IP address as Suzy rn. You write with the same style, or lack of.

And best strategy is to wait, wait wait…? FOR WHAT??? When the cows come home? In case you didn’t know, hospitals are playing in a competitive landscape – take a look at those that have closed their doors. Keep waiting and see where that gets you. And, in the meantime, your patients are getting great variance of care from the doctors within the same specialty at your own hospital. THAT is a malpractice lawsuite, my friend.

By: not tired of suzy rn

not tired of suzy rn — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 23:28:20 +0000

Dr. Hauck’s “not eye popping” los and cost comments are deafening in their silence. This is consistent with the results fron two Harvard studies, outcomes and costs do not improve.

If the costs and los do not improve, it was asked earlier: What exactly is the profit motive for the hospital? Dr. Hauck, do you or the hospital leadership or the hospital itself have equity in Cerner? Are there joint ventures to experiment on patients to develop new products and if so, have the patients signed consent?

Well? Sup?? Does the good Doctor Hauck wish to answer?

To make matters worse, the costs of malpractice insurance will go up with EMRs and the more dangerous and unproven CPOE gear.

Doctors and nurses be ware these care directing instruments as a cause for more malpractice claims against you. Best strategy is to wait, wait, wait, before wasting your money.

By: 41 year MD

41 year MD — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 22:40:58 +0000

As a physician in the generation that can be considered “slow adopters” or “the laggers”, I must say that this interview reflects everything my organization is seeing as well. We are not as large as Adventist (although we use a Cerner EMR as well), but we see dramatic improvements in ED wait times, Coding efficiencies, and most importantly…clinician satisfaction. Our early system (which shall remain nameless) was garbage…and now, not only Cerner but many others, have finally proven efficacy and safety are priorities in their industry.

I applaude not only Cerner, but all EMR companies that are providing us with the next generation of healthcare technology, and especially those that are robust and integrated.

Suzy, I find your comments not only negative and irrelevant, but I am embarrassed by the lack of acceptance in you as a clinician.

By: Back away from the irony

Back away from the irony — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 16:04:03 +0000

Measuring the impact “…pre and post implementation” is a responsible, fundamental, and good business practice. How in the world does that elicit “sounds like an experiment”?

I think I can explain that one. Suzy is working off a set of talking points, and one of those talking points is that EMR’s are experimental devices. When you conduct an experiment you collect pre and post experimental data. So, when you collect pre and post implementation data, that means you are conducting an experiment. Talking points logic.