1) Boston’s BI-Deaconess’ CIO on proper computerized provider order entry (CPOE) implementation (which can also be extrapolated to EHRs): “CPOE must be a system created by the clinicians, not inflicted on them.”
My take: Health information technology is designed by programmers with little experience or knowledge about physician workflow. This is understandable since doctors are not the ones writing computer software. Involving clinicians intimately with every health IT decision is critical for it to be accepted. Physicians are the ultimate judge and jury when it comes to successful IT implementation, as Cedars-Sinai can attest to.
2) Health Beat salivates over the VA’s VistA EHR.
My take: I’ve used VistA extensively. It’s a good system. But what’s the price to pay for such information technology nirvana? Pretty much a revamp of our entire health system to single-payer. Which is prohibitively expensive to ever happen this generation.
3) In some cases, the doctor rating website Vitals.com is publishing physicians’ unlisted cell phone numbers and home addresses.
My take: Is that really public information, or was it sold to them? In today’s meat-cleaving, psychologist attacking sometimes dangerous practice environment, be judicious to whom you are disclosing personal information to. And that includes professional medical societies who may be selling our information to these websites.
Related posts:
- Lawyer rating websites
- How bad do online doctor rating sites suck?
- The fallacy of doctor rating websites
- Fighting back against doctor rating websites
- The government assault on VistA
- Fixing doctor rating sites
- VistA: Holding health IT back?
{ 2 comments }
The hunt is on.
Docs may have to live Saddam. Call a pharmacy with a cell phone, the world knows the number. Use only disposable ones. Live in a beat Nissan cab, driving from one spider hole to another, every night. Cook rice in their underwear.
Vitals.com possibly has some good points, but they seem to have a number of data errors. That’s not so bad, BUT they do not seem to have much interest in correcting them. They have no published phone number, and e-mails to them generate responses that are pretty vague.
One other issue is that doctors can be negatively flagged based on where they went to med school, or where they did their residency. Here’s the problem: If a doctor is a pediatrician, why is it relevant if the cardiac surgery program or orthopedic program at their residency hospital got a poor rating? And moreover, if the residency was finished in 1978, of what relevance is that hospital’s “star quality” rating in 2008, thirty years later!
Comments on this entry are closed.