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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (6528)	3/26/2009 2:43:04 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

>> Many current patients and doctors will never see any savings from it. True. I think once the costs come down, it will be different. But right now, implementation is insanely expensive. Another problem that they're overlooking is that staff turnover in physicians offices and hospitals is huge. We go in and do training when we do an install and a couple years later the same clinic will have virtually nobody working there who has been trained. I know the problem is similar in many hospitals. So, even though the system SHOULD provide some efficiency improvement, the benefits are mitigated by the under-utilization and chronic work-arounds of untrained personnel. The solution, training them, adds even more cost to the picture. I really think the administration is either being misled or is misleading people (or a bit of both) as to the gains to be had. In the long haul, once providers make the leap I think most are happy with the result. I'm not sure most would find the efficiency improvements to be worth what they spend, however. Maybe over time.