Interesting NYTimes Article on EMRs
Just came across the following op-ed in the Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/opinion/02thu2.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
It discusses the extremely poor adoption of electronic medical record (EMR) systems throughout hospitals and physican offices, and touches on a major factor that, until addressed, will prevent EMRs from obtaining the widespread adoption that President Obama would like to see. And by the way, just throwing money at hospitals and physicians and telling them to implement EMRs is not going to do anything to fix the problem. It’s a lot more complicated than that, although yes, money is definitely a part of it.
The subject is of particular interest to me, as I am leaving the information security and technology realm for medicine. I’ve designed several large systems before, and have seen the obstacles that you have to deal with. This article does hit the nail on the head, albeit several years late. Of particular importance is the following:
The ultimate goal is an “interoperable” system that would allow easy exchange of clinical data between hospitals and doctors. The modernization effort will have limited value if a mélange of different computer systems can’t talk to one another.
While applying to medical school two years ago, I wrote one of my secondary application essays on the very subject of interoperability and what I view as the only way to solve the problem. That essay is attached here for your perusal.
EMR Secondary Application Essay Response
3 comments
That’s a superb essay, Chris. You hit a bunch of nails on the head that are quite current today.
A week ago on the e-patient blog I wrote about what happened when I tried to move my data from my hospital’s “PatientSite” system into Google Health, using the interface that had been much publicized a year earlier. The results were a farce, almost a scandal honestly, and have produced 70 comments and many linkbacks from other blogs, including most notably tonight from Adam Bosworth, who was a father of Google Health and this other thing called XML.
One of the things revealed in this discussion is the severe consequences when the data model on one side of a transfer doesn’t match up with the data model on the other side. I’m sure you know all about that. The other dirty secret that’s coming to light is that a lot of EMRs are not actually medical records, they’re just billing systems, and the data in them is often entered by billing clerks who know nothing about you medically.
That’s what happened in my case and the results were pretty astonishing.
So yeah, what you said. Right.
Keep in touch in the next few years.
btw, don’t know if you caught it, but Nova just started a two-part series called Doctor’s Diaries. They followed 7 students through medical school in 1987; that was recapped in part 1, which is at http://twurl.nl/twnci4.
Next Tuesday is part 2, where they see what’s happened in the 21 years since then.
Part 1 was very good for me – helped me fortify my already-pretty-good empathy for docs.
I did catch it, and I thought it was very well put together. Last year ABC aired a mini-series called Hopkins, which followed several docs at Johns Hopkins. I thought the Nova airing was much more entertaining and also much more human in their portrayal of the people in question. Although I haven’t yet been through the process myself, it seemed a lot more in line with what I’ve learned from those who’ve gone before me.
Leave a Comment