If so, would you like to elaborate on your experience with leading EPM/EMR solutions, ICS repositories, HL7, EDI, lab and radiology interfaces, eRX solutions, the importance and application of fax services and how practices need to deliver these solutions for meaningful use? Are you clear on the timelines and incentives for meaningful use and when they turn into penalties if those milestones and metrics are not met? Can you elaborate on how those metrics are measured, what they are, and which ones a provider has to select as their meaningful use metric goal? Do you understand how the clinical workflow in a knowledgebase based EPM solution provides a checklist for workflow during a patient check-in process?
I could go on with page after page of this very detailed discussion that only makes sense to individuals involved deeply in medical practice healthcare. Hospital and Emergency Room healthcare is generally a different, and monolithic beast altogether. Most medical care is given by general practioners in a small to medium physicians group to patients that do not require urgent clinical response. Part of the problem right now in medicine is that the lethargic and outdated systems in emergency and hospital response *are* legacy systems that cannot support ePHI portability of patient records that are gathered during *primary* care situations. Patient care quality suffers as a result, and that is where you get missed conditions, perscription incompatibility and missed or incorrect allergy alerts and notifications leading to complications. Let's not even get into the revenue, billing and AR cycle end of electronic healthcare practice.
Doctors have wildly adopted iOS and OS X devices for their healthcare practices. If they can buy Airbooks and iPads for themselves and expect those to work with their electronic healthcare solutions - then we can expect them to set up their check-in desks with Windows 7 based PCs that are running something more recent than a Pentium-D.
Oddly, someone recently challenged me on the claim that it is a best practice to disable the default admin accounts in Windows because of the unique RID that is part of the account SID, caliming that this is a Microsoft Official Curriculum best practice that isn't ever applied in the real world - and that merely renaming the accounts was enough of a security measure. That kind of allegation is fighting words among IT professionals. "Did you just accuse me of only knowing the Microsoft Test answer for an IT solution, and not the real world application of the technology? We're gonna have a problem..." I'm feeling a little on the defensive at the moment.
If this was directed at someone else (myngledust), you can disregard this message. I couldn't figure out who your post was aimed at.
