Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (296152)	3/12/2009 3:05:17 AM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794033

Any idea of how many "scientific courses" the Politico’s take during their College and Graduate years to prepare them to be a Politician????? Heh. Maybe one or two? Or less. The two Docs who wrote the article have some great ideas, but they must have many more Doctors and Scientists to help get their views heard.... Honestly, IMO, most of the "digitize everything" should be only granted to the individual Doctors for the patient. Doctors are like Lawyers....client privilege for privacy. The Hospitals are doing everything they can do to keep people OUT of the hospitals, so they really can't be serious we should pay BILLIONS more dollars so they can have the info about our every little hiccup... What the digitized records will really do is put another nail in the BIG Brother concept.... We need the president to apply real scientific rigor to fix our health-care system rather than rely on elegant exercises in wishful thinking

To: KLP who wrote (296152)	3/12/2009 7:54:53 AM
From: John Carragher	Respond to of 794033

computer records are only as good as the input. now we pay doctor fees to enter data vs clerks. My group at a top hospital are all on computer screens and the doctor does the direct entry.. However, we are paying dearly for it.. this is not reducing medical costs rather it increases overall costs. figure at least five minutes a visit to update records, prior they would make notes. If these doctors see thirty patients a day we have lost approximately 2.5 hours of doctor productivity. If each visit average twenty minutes, which now includes five minutes of data processing and lost exam time, then doctors could average seeing about eight more patients a day. i assume doctors are putting in ten hour days. I expect everyone has run up against the doctor who just cannot get through the screens and takes at least ten minutes to enter data.

To: KLP who wrote (296152)	3/12/2009 9:42:37 AM
From: DMaA	Respond to of 794033

The medical center my wife works at (and where I used to work) studied this very carefully. They decided that an EMR would NOT save money, but the added expense was justified because of the improvement to patient care it would facilitate. Eight years experience with their EMR has born this out. It is very expensive and it does improve patient care in many ways. But again, there are no compelling data to demonstrate that such voluminous documentation translates into better outcomes for their sick patients. That is short sighted. What an EMR DOES do is help care givers document what works and what doesn't. Over time this will lead to more effective treatment and less wasted money. On a related subject, my wife reports that people have started missing appointments in droves and have stopped making new appointments. I was over there yesterday. The place was empty.

To: KLP who wrote (296152)	3/12/2009 10:57:03 AM
From: Neeka	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794033

My doctor has been using EMRs for about 5 years now. I'm wondering if it was mandated by Regence, and also suspect that she paid the price out of her pocket to update her records to electronic media. Personally, I think it's a great way to keep records, and I love the fact that I am allowed complete access from my computer. Of course what I object to is govt funding. She did in in her office without govt funding (I'll be sure to ask next time I'm in), so why can't others? Just another Nanny State intrusion imo. I don't think my doctor's fees are out of line, and I am billed at the insurer's base cost, which I assume is in line with other providers regardless of whether they've updated their system or not? I could be wrong!