Slashdot Mirror
Electronic Health Records Now In All US Military Hospitals
smitty777 writes "Information Week is reporting on the inclusion of Electronic Health Records (EHRs) in all US military hospitals. This is significant in that it allows the sharing of patient information on a worldwide scale, improving care. This is leading a national trend currently motivated by HIT Meaningful Use legislation, which provides incentives for civilian physicians to adopt EHRs. Not that the adoption is without challenges. The usability of EHRs is also an ongoing concern."
I work in Biomedical Science, and see first hand the importance of accurate patient information. Not just for the obvious emergency where its important to know an unconscious person is a diabetic, or for doctors to know allergies etc.
It is also important to know what diseases are prevalant in population, what diseases need management, where resources are needed etc. These are things that are very difficult to do at the moment because of the lack of centralised up-to-date information. A national study needs to be compiled from data from different states, countries, small departments within systems within states...its a nightmare! It could be so much better if we availed of the technology available today.
People are worried about their privacy, but from whom exactly? Who does the common guy on the street fear with their information? Surely it is a good thing your attending doctor has your history? And nobody else is allowed access. And nobody else cares! What about celebrities? Fine, have an opt out. Easy.
People are going to get into a frenzy about privacy, politicians are going to tip-toe around the issue for fear of public outrage over privacy, pathetic journalists are going to stir up peoples fears, and lives are going to be lost. Privacy is fundamental to the system, and needs to be designed in, but the benefits (lives saved) are too great to ignore.
The janitors are civilian contractors. The rest is accurate. What is so strange?
If by "scares" you mean manufactured, misleading hyperbole, you're wrong. There are tens of thousands of adverse drug interactions annually in the UK (and more in the USA). Many of these are avoidable (they're not just drug-drug interactions, adverse drug-condition or drug-{age,procedure} interactions occur too) and key to avoiding this is delivering timely, accurate information to your healthcare providers.
Keeping yourself off the relevant clinical databases is a choice and a compromise of risks; on the one hand the risk that your data will be leaked and on the other hand that your choice to equip your clinicians with less information will cause you to get less effective treatment in the future.
In some senses this is a balancing of benefits to do different people; first, your healthy, vigorous, young self. Second, your elderly, sick, incapacitated self. The latter cares most about the privacy angle but I'm pretty sure the latter cares most about the quality of care. But it would too late for the elderly you to benefit their treatment by reversing the decision made by their younger self.
As a vet, waiting for paper records was a hassle. Gimme instant access, and equally important give my Tricare providers instant access.
I don't give a damn if they stream my colonoscopy video on Redtube or if Slashdot uses my hernia scar for a background.
I want efficient medical care, and must say the military has done well for me for 30 years (active and retired).
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
No, because military doctors make less, and don't need malpractice insurance. Now, speaking as one who has been on Tri-Care: you get what you pay for.
In fact they do not have to have that permission. There is a (truck wide) hole in the law that allows disclosure for treatment or business purposes. Both of your examples would fall under this exception.