http://www.markle.org/downloadable_assets/20101007_bluebutton_pr.pdf

current survey information....  Just seeing whats out there.  ST

"This represents a remarkable agreement between the general population and doctors,"
Diamond said. "In fact, only 7 percent of the public and only 15 percent of the doctors
disagreed with a statement that patients should be able to download copies of their
pertinent health information."

Firing the Veterans Administration hospital system for incompetence? Hah! Nobody EVER gets disciplined. They can release the records of 100,000 vets (and have) and not one employee gets fired. It can't be done. They answer to the feds and not the patients.

You'd be amazed how many of those workstations remain logged-in all day, or (and THIS one REALLY surprised me) the password was in plain sight, on a card easily visible to anyone seated at the PC.

Veterans Administration mistakes got these Google hits....

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expIds=26637,26992,27102&sugexp=ldymls&xhr=t&q=Veterans+Administration+mistakes&cp=31&pf=p&sclient=psy&aq=f&aqi=g5&aql=&oq=Veterans+Administration+mistake&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=634607d52d82d8c1

Quote from: Solars Toy on October 17, 2010, 09:40:37 AM
Since you have obviously spoken to various doctors about this I will have to question  mine next time I am in.  Maybe they just put up a good show for me when I am there... :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\

I've talked to dozens of doctors about this subject and probably reviewed the progress notes of more than 150 different physicians over the past decade. I promise you I am speaking from experience.

I've talked to dos

ST, these surveys are interesting but they directly contradict more than a decade of first hand observations. Sorry, but I'm not convinced. I read nothing there to make me stop believing my eyes and ears.

A quick scan of the people running the markle foundation make me question it's objectivity on this liberal passion project.

Zoe Baird is the president of the board. She was Clinton's first nominee to the justice department.
Tom Bernstien was a member of Michael Bloomberg's transition team. He was president of board of directors for Human Rights First. He was connected to NPR.
Lewis Kaden is on the board of trustees for the century foundation and on the board of human rights first.

And likewise you probably won't convince me it is a bad thing.  :) :) :)

Didn't this whole thing start under Bush? 

Quote from: Solars Toy on October 17, 2010, 02:03:12 PM
And likewise you probably won't convince me it is a bad thing.  :) :) :)

Didn't this whole thing start under Bush?

1. I'm not a huge Bush fan. Not sure how that's a point in it's favor.
2. What do you think about the liberal bias within the group that generated the poll you referenced?
3. Exactly how do you think that non medical types imposing a method of testing upon doctors, against their will, is supposed to be a good thing?

Quote from: Dan on October 17, 2010, 02:11:14 PM
1. I'm not a huge Bush fan. Not sure how that's a point in it's favor.
2. What do you think about the liberal bias within the group that generated the poll you referenced?
3. Exactly how do you think that non medical types imposing a method of testing upon doctors, against their will, is supposed to be a good thing?

1 - Just pointing out it didn't start with Obama...
2 - If they found only liberal doctors then that is a problem.  But again my doctor seems to like it.  It makes our yearly get together go much smother and she is able to quickly cover with me the visits I had with other doctor within her practice during the year.
3 - It's called progress....and if it makes it better and safer for the patient then why is it so wrong to you?  Aren't our doctors suppose to be there for us finding better and more efficient ways to help us? 

Also you say it is against their will - are you sure all doctors feel that way.  Maybe it is making their jobs easier.......allowing them to make better decisions regarding care and less mistakes during emergency situations.  There are some upsides that you refuse to see.

You might also take into consideration HMO's where it is likely you will see a lot of different doctors I see this as invaluable to that situation.

You talk to one doctor once per year in the doctor patient relationship mode. I speak to lots of doctors during their down time, over drinks and even with their families. You decide if that brings anything relevant to the discussion.

As for leftwing bias, it can affect the wording of the questions, the selection of target populations and the determination of what information should be omitted. Preparer bias is everything when a leftwing group issues a self congratulatory study illustrating how right they were in the first place. Don't you think so?

As for progress, that word is long on emotion and short on substance. Will it be progress for private practice doctors to see their overhead go up and their revenue go down? Will it be progress to add one more inducement to having doctors decide to stop taking new Medicare patients? What about when a different doctor makes a mistake and the insurance company denies payment on a needed test because it contradicts the incorrect diagnosis of a prior doctor. There are going to be a ton of unintended consequences and you can bet your bottom dollar one of them is going to be to attack doctors on reimbursements for longer visits and expensive diagnostic tests. As such, I worry about EMR becoming an unintended cause for more deaths, not less.

The only way EMR works is if you standardize the format by which ALL doctors document patient visits. This will make the doctors more cautious, less intuitive and more clerical in their approach to medicine. Think of the guys behind the counter at the DMV. The personal aspects of healthcare will be limited as the doctors learn to practice medicine by the cookie cutter approach of the standardized format. Also think about what an incredibly short leash you are putting doctors on. Every decision they make will be at the finger tips of a reviewer or possibly a plantiff's attorney in a malpractice lawsuit. That pretty much insures these doctors will be in a constant ass covering mode. Treating you will be secondary consideration mo matter what kind of friendly chat you have with your doctor on your annual visit.  ;)

I have heard both arguments.  I am going to take a short recess and be back with my decision...

Quote from: taxed on October 17, 2010, 03:19:06 PM
I have heard both arguments.  I am going to take a short recess and be back with my decision...

It takes must out of doctors pockets. It makes it harder for doctors to get paid for the work they do. And it will make it easier for the doctors to get sued. That's the "it ain't gonna work" trifecta.

Interesting points and things to consider.   :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\

But I still like my ability to get my records and view my test results.... :) :) :) 

Ok...

Dan is talking about process, not the actual medium and benefits of how a record is stored.

I think we all, Dan included, and doctors, would agree electronic records, secure, would be ideal.  A doctor, in all reality, could care less how a record is stored.  They couldn't care less if records were stored on napkins.  They want to do it the way they always have, since the beginning of time, without added cost.

Doctors aren't like us regular folk.  Think of the Einstein story of him walking to work without his pants.  Their brains don't want to deal with all this extra technical crap that they have to get perfect or they get sued or don't get paid.  They want to consult and diagnose the patient, read their previous history on paper in front of them, and write the new stuff down and call it the day.

If a doctor could just write it down as he always has, and hand the record off to an assistant for her to enter it into the EMR system and file, then this is a non-issue.  However, the government (correct me if I am wrong Dan) doesn't allow that.  They make the entire process a boobie trap that forces them into an insane process that no right minded person would accept and adhere to.  if a doctor could just talk into a dictaphone the data, hand that off to a transcriber or whatever, and be done, then no issue.  If he could have someone take the stuff down, format it, and have him review and correct errors before committing it, then no issue.

I would love a medical system with EMR, where doctors don't have to worry about the crap and can just be doctors, and let some private sector solution figure out the best way to do it by working around and adhering to the doctor.

From the little I know about it, I know that isn't possible, so would be adementaly against EMR, in the form it is in now.  Give me the project, get the gov out and let me do it my way, let me talk to 1,000 doctors, and I would solve the problem in two weeks.

Quote from: taxed on October 17, 2010, 04:47:39 PM
Ok...

Dan is talking about process, not the actual medium and benefits of how a record is stored.

I think we all, Dan included, and doctors, would agree electronic records, secure, would be ideal.  A doctor, in all reality, could care less how a record is stored.  They couldn't care less if records were stored on napkins.  They want to do it the way they always have, since the beginning of time, without added cost.

Doctors aren't like us regular folk.  Think of the Einstein story of him walking to work without his pants.  Their brains don't want to deal with all this extra technical crap that they have to get perfect or they get sued or don't get paid.  They want to consult and diagnose the patient, read their previous history on paper in front of them, and write the new stuff down and call it the day.

If a doctor could just write it down as he always has, and hand the record off to an assistant for her to enter it into the EMR system and file, then this is a non-issue.  However, the government (correct me if I am wrong Dan) doesn't allow that.  They make the entire process a boobie trap that forces them into an insane process that no right minded person would accept and adhere to.  if a doctor could just talk into a dictaphone the data, hand that off to a transcriber or whatever, and be done, then no issue.  If he could have someone take the stuff down, format it, and have him review and correct errors before committing it, then no issue.

I would love a medical system with EMR, where doctors don't have to worry about the crap and can just be doctors, and let some private sector solution figure out the best way to do it by working around and adhering to the doctor.

From the little I know about it, I know that isn't possible, so would be adementaly against EMR, in the form it is in now.  Give me the project, get the gov out and let me do it my way, let me talk to 1,000 doctors, and I would solve the problem in two weeks.

I would give it to you if I could....just remember I want my perks. ;D ;D ;D