Alborg, development of ANY SYSTEMS, Medical Treatment Systems, Software Systems, Technology it is THE EARLY ADOPTERS who pay the highest price. In the development of medical treatment systems, it is very well the test subjects that pay the highest price. They show us WHAT DOES NOT WORK and allow the researcher to figure out the why. Technology is no different.
If you look at this AC board, it is EASY to spot the EARLY ADOPTERS. Those are the people who cut their teeth because of their early adoption of AC, long before it "was proven."
Your statement on EPIC and Kaiser seemed to suggest that the system is a failure, however, a recent article in the
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel contained the following:
What Epic and its competitors build is software with the potential to transform health care.
The move from paper charts to electronic medical records is in its earliest stages. But the key challenges facing the U.S. health care system - lessening the variation in how medicine is practiced, improving quality, lowering costs - require better use of information technology.
It is a hugely expensive and complex undertaking.[Obviously Kaiser understands this]
Froedtert & Community Health and the Medical College of Wisconsin, which are installing an Epic system, estimate that the project will cost them $70 million.
The end result will change the way health care is delivered and may even save lives.
In place of flipping through paper charts, often with incomprehensible notes, doctors will be able to call up a patient's entire medical history.
Prompts alert doctors to a patient's family history and conditions that must be monitored. Other prompts note when tests should be done. Still other features provide quick access to guidelines for treating specific diseases.
The systems hold the potential to improve the coordination of care, reduce errors and eliminate unnecessary tests. But their real benefit could be years down the road: helping doctors determine which treatments provide the best care at the lowest cost and identifying potentially harmful treatments. [This is talking about about the DECISION SUPPORT ASPECT, which is never mentioned in the discussion of EHR]
Epic's software enabled Kaiser, the country's largest health system,to confirm that Vioxx increased the risk of blood clots, leading to the prescription painkiller being pulled from the market.
Addition link:
A Physician’s Experience with Kaiser’s Epic/HealthConnect Rollout By Bernie Tupperman, MD I would prefer to keep the discussion to CCHIT, instead you continue to throw in red herrings such as "universal health care." When you know full well the two are not tied together, and it is possible to have one without the other.
So you can spend all the time decrying CCHIT as a "criminal enterprise." It is going to happen, and no amount of complaining is going to change that. That process started LONG BEFORE Obama.
I intended to focus on HOW to make it better, as opposing it and leaving nothing in it's wake.
