Just do it, says health IT guru John Halamka.
Less than 20 percent of doctors nationwide have adopted the needed technology, and the primary reason is money.
It’s estimated to cost about $50,000 for each physician to institute digital records, totaling $350 million in Massachusetts alone.
Stark laws allow physicians affiliated with medical centers to be helped financially, but that doesn’t include the majority of doctors who practice independently.
The ball is in the government’s court. If universal electronic records are the happen, they have the ability to make it so.
Related posts:
- Why doctors are reluctant to adopt electronic records
- Why physicians don’t adopt electronic medical records
- Why physicians don’t adopt electronic records
- Electronic records and economic sense
- Op-ed: Why doctors still balk at electronic medical records
- Medical students who are used to electronic records
- Electronic records by 2014?
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 6 comments }
“The ball is in the government’s court. If universal electronic records are the happen, they have the ability to make it so.”
When this is what physicians say when its time to upgrade technology, you can hear the universal healthcare train coming round the tracks!
As far as I know, the government isn’t typically involved in “universal standards” of any technology, from the now-outdated beta/VCR “war” to programs which run across platforms of all kinds. The market has typically driven it. Why do we expect the government to “make it so” with this technology?
“Just do it, says health IT guru John Halamka.”
Hm, let’s examine the above statement. Apparently we are supposed to just do it, and turn off any thoughts as to whether our practice would benefit. Interesting concept…
And let’s see, some-one with the title of health IT guru. Does anyone expect a health IT guru to say anything else?
The problem remains the same: existing software is not cost-effective, or does not meet the needs of practices that have chosen to not adopt a system. That makes their decision rational, in my book.
While it is true that the Government could make EMRs the standard, much in the same way they could push the auto industry to natural gas if they desired, their focus is on policy like ICD10.
If we truly wanted EMRs to be come standard, the insurance companies (the market) are the places where the push should come from.
Best,
V
http://vansantos.com
EMR’s should better wait until the Govt is serious about the Healthcare Bailout. Until then, the nine worst words in the English language remain, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”
Don’t think. Don’t resist the flow of the rest of the lemmings. Resistance is futile. If you protest or question the unquestioned assumptions, you are evil or ignorant.
Sounds like a religion, or at least a “movement”.
Does anyone think universal EMR can be secure when no other area of computing is secure?
Does anyone think that doctors are anti-technolgy when they have now surpassed even the space program in using cutting edge technology every day?
Does anyone think that doctors are mostly fools who would refuse to use technology if it really made them more efficient (and therefore more money)?
Does anyone trust government with the story of their shame and depression over finding out that their wife is screwing his father?
Does anyone who might ever run for public office want his psychiatrist’s records on computerized online database–no matter how secure it is claimed to be?
Does anyone with any kind of enemies whatsoever want his social history available to hackers?
Information is power. That is why Nixon’s henchmen broke into Daniel Elsburg’s psychiatrist’s office. At least they had to physically go there to do that.
Comments on this entry are closed.