<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on Poll: Why aren't more physicians adopting electronic health records? ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-19T03:18:56-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I am married to a physician]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3280155]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I am married to a physician which is a partner in her practice. The number one reason why they have not, is the cost. Most of the practices that have implemented EMR are affiliated with a hospital. Therefore the hospital picks up the cost.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3280155]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[MountyTech]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2010 17:12:52 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I'd check those stats on uninsured if I were you, and what]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3279007]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[they call uninsured, and level of insurance. According to the US Census the USA has 307 million people - but there probably is another 13 or more million illegals unaccounted for.But, let's take 307 million and you say only 20 million are uninsured and half are fit young people. What insurance covers the unemployed, the homeless, poor, and elderly without much money?The US government stats puts 12% of the population at below the poverty line - and they wouldn't have insurance to cover expensive operations - that's  over 36 million right there.The US government stats puts unemployment at about 9.3% there's another 27 million who are unlikely to have insurance.Then those on the basic insurance that doesn't cover the more expensive operations. And if they do, how much to they pay for the expensive drugs required following the operations for cancer treatments?Then lets go have a look at the stats for the periods the surveys covered.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3279007]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Deadly Ernest]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:27:04 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I've never had problem with a doctor transferring a file to]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3279006]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[another doctor, or just sharing information when I ask them to. I wonder what doctors are like in your area - or if the laws are different.I've lived in a couple of states now, and I do know the state laws on privacy and control of the medical profession are different between the states. In one, I asked for the file, the doctor made a copy for their records (legal reasons) and gave it to me to hand to the new doctor when I get settled in the new location. In another state, they weren't allowed to do that by the state law, and had to fax it over when the new doctor sent them a written request for it over my signature. The docs had no trouble with sending it on.Mind you, the same issues will apply with an electronic file, too.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3279006]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Deadly Ernest]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:18:17 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Ever think the paitent don't want it ether.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3279034]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I don't mind people knowing I have high BP, or my Cholesterol numbers aren't as good as they should be, but I'm dammed if I want everyone knowing I had syphilis (oh ****)...anyway you get my drift.  Long term problems, sure, medications I take as maintenance, sure, but little things that have no impact on my future health or a doctors decision on how to treat me, nope.  Not his/her business and I'm not willing to let every government IT professional or every doctor in the new medical bureaucracies being created have that information.  That is the biggest problem I fear, fun reading for the masses?oooh look at this one, he got his penis stuck in a milk jar?look the piercing in her nipple got infected.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3279034]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[prpetty]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 20:25:46 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I'm not sure about the stats]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3279031]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[But when you look at the un-insured in the US you find about 20 million (if you don't include the illegal aliens).  About half of that 20 million are young healthy adults that opt out of getting insrance.  Given a country with 320 million people the stats don't seem that far out to me.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3279031]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[prpetty]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 19:57:50 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[The Doc]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3279025]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[What I have found that the Doctor does not want to share your file with another doctor or thy dont want to release itThy treat it like it is thier property and not yours   My self I think you should be able to take your file to another Doctor and be treated by whom you would to be treated.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3279025]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[harryolden@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 19:37:49 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Luddite ?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3278935]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I hope you jest, sir: &quot;her response was that it cost too much, she was happy with her paper as it never had a power failure and she didn't want to hire someone to look after all that stuff. I put her down as a Luddite.&quot;* A well structured and maintained paper record can be a perfectly acceptable way of maintaining patient records in a small office/clinic--the problem is that too many clinics' record management is in shambles.* The acquisition cost is significant, of course, and the on-going support cost is frequently understated by vendors.&quot;Tablets...an enabling technology...&quot;  Perhaps, but first you must have software than is congruent with the practitioner's mental model of patient care and clinic workflow.  There is no hardware solution without an appropriate software model.I worked in medicine with an IT special interest for 32 years and came to understand that the mental model of health care used by primary care doctors is vastly different than that used by nurses, pharmacists and laboratorians.  A topic for a separate discussion should be:  &quot;How do the differing thought processes of various health care providers differ, and how should that impact design of the EMR?&quot;]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3278935]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[hwpratt@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 06:54:21 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[More Other Reasons]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3278713]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Computerized records take longer for the physician to complete -- if a system adds &quot;only&quot; 3 minutes per patient encounter time and a doc sees 40 patients in a day in the office, he/she has to work an additional 120 minutes to see the same number of patients!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3278713]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[hwpratt@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 17 Apr 2010 06:24:45 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[OK, having given many reason hwy they aren't,]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277847]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[here's a few why they should, and some advantages.My personal GP, here in Australia, has been using an electronic system for five years or more, not exactly sure when they started using it, but it was in obvious full usage when they shifted to their new building back in early 2005. They are part of a group of practices in four rural towns in the area I live in. The practice here is typical of all four, five doctors (one has seven) two visiting dentists, visiting specialists - ultra sound, psychologist, nutritionist, podiatrist, dietician, eye doctor (spell checker won't find the right word for me), pathology services. records are transferred between practices as required when people move between towns. Advantages include; x-rays and specialist reports are sent electronically to the doctor and received within 48 hours of being taken, some quicker. Doctors type their records, scripts are printed by the system, as are medical referrals and certificates. No confusion with the chemist about what a script is, or what test is wanted at the specialist - I still don't know what it means, but I can read it if I want to look it up. The big advantage, if I have to see a doctor at another practice within the group in another town while in that town, it only takes a few minutes to get my whole file. I can see big advantages to such a system. But can also see why some are hanging back.Now, some have spoken about unproven tech, this group have been using this system for five years, I think you can say it's proven tech. Why the same system isn't being used in the US, I don't know - but it could easily be used there, if it wasn't bought from there in the first place.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277847]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Deadly Ernest]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 20:03:15 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Overseas experience]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277765]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I am a GP in Australia, and here, most GP's use electronic health records. We try to run a paperless office, with results of all tests, all correspondence, emails, xrays all available electronically within a few mouse clicks. It works well, is much more efficient and time saving, which makes up for any down time the system experiences. One of the most basic advantages is being able to read the previous doctor's notes which previously may have required high level decription to decipher when handwritten. I advise switching to computer records yesterday!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277765]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[nicknic44]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:51:18 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Before you go about comparing surgery stats, you need to]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277763]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[make sure you are looking at the EXACT same sets of surgery stats. I'm no advocate of the UK or Aust National Health system, but one point they do have ahead of the US private health system is people are seen, diagnosed and treated - regardless of their economic situation. Another thing I hate worse is people trying to compare stats that are not related to each other.In the UK system you can be sure that the number of people with Breast Cancer or Prostate Cancer included in those stats is better than 95% of those with it, if not actually 100%. On the other hand, you can be just as certain that the number with those illnesses in the US treated for those illnesses is no where near the 90% and likely to be very much lower than that. Why you ask - economics, those who can't afford the treatment or diagnosis won't be treated, so they won't show. And it's those at the low end of the economic scale that are less likely to recover well.Thus, where the UK has more people surviving less than 5 years, in the US, they don't even get the chance at those five years as they don't get treated because they can't afford it.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277763]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Deadly Ernest]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:46:16 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: Poll: Why aren't more physicians adopting electronic health records?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277745]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Benefits to EHR would be ready availability of information.Here in Canada, you see a GP. The GP then refers you to a specialist and only after they have sent you home, exchanged some FAXes with some specialists to find one with an open appointment that they then call you to tell you when and where to go and then they have to FAX a quantity of the GP's records to that specialist to prepare them for seeing you and down the rabbit hole we go.So, an EHR should also have access to the scheduling system of the various medical professionals, so that the records can be sent in concert with your appointment that would be arranged by the GP.If the record data were used anonymously, then drug information could be tracked such that long after a drug has been approved for use, it's efficacy can be monitored and if there were a bad batch, tracking the drug and the affected patients down would be easier as well as realistic.For the case of epidemics and pandemics, EHR would also facilitate containing outbreaks and narrowing down ground zero so that sample collections if required could be made appropriately.In industry, we ship everything to schedule, from the tiniest component to really large stuff, hardly anything sits on a shelf anymore, so why should the data sit on a shelf in a manilla folder.You can purchase a large screen LCD TV for around $300.00 at your local best buy that was made three months ago in China. If it wasn't for our efficiencies in moving both data and material, that LCD TV would cost over $1500.00.Time for the medical profession to get with it.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277745]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[tomkinsr@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:08:10 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: Poll: Why aren't more physicians adopting electronic health records?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277744]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I canvassed my GP here in Canada, her response was that it cost too much, she was happy with her paper as it never had a power failure and she didn't want to hire someone to look after all that stuff. I put her down as a Luddite.Tablet's are possibly an enabling technology in this area.I have found that almost all dental practises make extensive use of computers and other technologies in their practises. My children's orthodontist uses a fingerprint scanner to check in all patients on arrival and emails appointment reminders through a CRM of some kind. He makes extensive use of imaging, both X-ray and digital camera.Overall, I would suggest that doctors do not get it.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277744]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[tomkinsr@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:55:19 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Bones says: &quot;Da..It Jim, I'm a Dr. not a Vulcan ... &quot;]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277720]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[It is still too early in the development of computer hardware and software. There is still too much complexity that has to be mangled (sic) manually.Old system: paper (blank or preprinted form), pencil/pen, folders, filing cabinets and people who learned to read in grade school (maybe with additional medical training later) to do the filing and retrieval.New System: Computer (very complex), Operating system (unbelievably complex), Application Software, Network, Storage, Disaster Recovery (mandatory when you have an e-system, not required for paper), training for all users (Dr and Nurses), ongoing upgrade training, trained technicians paid as much as Dr's charge to constantly maintain the technology.Many years down the line, when computing and network infrastructure has become a utility and is as transparent and pervasive as paper and pen or electrical system or water system, only then will electronic medical records become common.  Because the underlying technology will be mature and will actually be a utility that even a 3 year old can use. And when all of the legal (HIPA etc) implications have been smoothed out and general knowledge (like the automotive rules of the road).For now the same people who buy new technologies as soon as they are available, paying the high bleeding-edge price premium, will try to go electronic.  You know the guys who have quadraphonic LP, 8 tracks, Cassettes, 8&quot; laser disk platter, CD, DVD, Blu-ray systems the size of suit-cases in their attics and basements.Sure they will see some advantages, but they will also pay the bleeding-edge adopter premium.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277720]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Ron_007]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 13:33:19 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[What &quot;private system&quot;?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277667]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The so-called &quot;health care&quot; reform bill--excuse me, LAW--isn't just mandatory insurance, it's mandatory EHR, too. Viewable by anybody with a government-recognised interest in your health--no consent required, no opt-out allowed.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277667]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[wendygoerl@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:54:36 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Why EHR is a challenge &amp; you can keep your  NHS]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277619]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[A specialist has his own practice, has hospital privileges, and consults as part of a group.  Each entity has purchased a different system which unless it is 100% compatible with the other two, errors with irreparable consequences may occur.  Additionally, the doc has to learn how to operate three different systems/devices.  Don't forget security issues (PHI and HIPAA).  Are you going to allow the doc to use the same userID and password on multiple systems and how often will he have to change passwords?  And as soon as the group or hospital is bought or merged with another, it is time to learn a new system and ditch the old.  I have seen organ transplant billing where 48 (four dozen) different doctors had consulted, treated, diagnosed, confirmed, etc on one patient's transplant.  So with a mandatory EHR requirement, you have a choice between a monopolistic (read prohibitively expensive with little useful functionality), single choice decision with no chance of entrepreneurial improvement and innovation (AKA government/GE) or anarchy of many partially compatible &amp; generally reliable systems (possibly affordable, efficient, easy to use, but questionable accuracy, interoperability, and completeness with other systems).  I'll go with our private system over a govt system any day.Five Year Survival Rates: Breast Cancer: UK, 70%; US, 84%Prostate Cancer: UK, 51%; US, 92%My neighbor is a former Brit, now naturalized American.  Before he immigrated, he was involved in a car accident with cerebral skeletal injuries requiring surgery.  Fortunately, his employer had private insurance which allowed the surgeon to operate the next day.  NHS provided care would have put him at the end of an 18-month waiting line with the same surgeon.Source: Lancet Oncology, 2008]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277619]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Excelmann]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:05:50 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[glad you are the HIPPA guy]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277591]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The Privacy rule is the only set of rules that cover both paper and electronic information. Paper documents have always followed the privacy rule even when there weren't any regulations in place. In the medical industry, there was a standard practice of patient/doctor confidentiality rights.  The HIPAA privacy regulations is simply stating what the medical industry already did in protecting the patient/doctor confidentiality rights.But the bulk of HIPPA privacy, security rules deals with the electronic transmission of patient information which ensures confidentiality and upholds the patient/doctor confidentiality laws and the rules really pertain to certain electronic transactions which has information such as payment and payment history, medical conditions, health status that can be linked to an individual person. Given that virtually the entire medical record is that, any disclosure falls under HIPAA in the privacy or security rules.However, ePHI transactions really relate to billing/insurance and clearing houses. If you send in your billing by paper, as long as you adhere to the privacy rules, you comply and the medical industry has done that for decades.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277591]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Screen Gems]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 10:22:45 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Two More Missing Options]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277577]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Too expensive to convert with on clear paybackNo well-defined standards (VHS vs. Beta or Blue Ray vs. whatever-it-was)]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277577]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Lazarus439]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 10:05:40 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Small Business Attitude]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277546]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The typical physican is in a small business.  He has to be the professional and still run a profitable office.  Keeping  up with the new drugs and treatment is difficult enough.  Add all the insurance red tape and regulations to it an he won't  have time for golf.  His office manager must direct the office system.  He has to trust that person.  That manager must implement the system and train the doctor to use it.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277546]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Hal1000]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:22:36 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[My Healthcare provider in the US is the same]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277534]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[When you compare a provider in a system with electronic records to one without, the benefits are clear, especially if you see multiple providers within the system.  Information is readily shared and available to all concerned.  My husband had a heart attack and was taken to a hospital outside our system where I watched them labor with cumbersome paper charts.  Just locating pertinent information must have become very difficult in what became a 5 inch thick binder of his information.  When he was transferred to a hospital in our insurance system, they immediately input his records so that any health care professional helping him could easily review his history and information.  What could be better than that?I've watched Doctors in our system adapt to using the online system and have to say it must be better for them as well, once they get over the hurdle.  Writing is writing, whether you use a typewriter or longhand - the content is what matters and that's the part that hasn't changed.  I think a doctor can make crappy, unclear and incomplete notes as easily in longhand as they can typing.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-329195-3277534]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[svilla8874@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:01:39 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

