Slashdot Mirror


Back To Faxes: Doctors Can't Exchange Digital Medical Records

nbauman writes: Doctors with one medical records system can't exchange information with systems made by other vendors, including those at their own hospitals, according to the New York Times. One ophthalmologist spent half a million dollars on a system, but still needs to send faxes to get the information where it needs to go. The largest vendor is Epic Systems, Madison, WI, which holds almost half the medical records in the U.S. A report from RAND described Epic as a "closed" platform that made it "challenging and costly" for hospitals to interconnect.

The situation is bad for patients and costly for medical works: if doctors can't exchange records, they'll face a 1% Medicare penalty, and UC Davis alone has a staff of 22 dedicated to communication. On top of that, Epic charges a fee to send data to some non-Epic systems. Congress has held hearings on the matter, and Epic has hired a lobbyist. Epic's founder, billionaire computer science major Judith Faulkner, said that Epic was one of the first to establish code and standards for secure interchange, which included user authentication provisions and a legally binding contract. She said the federal government, which gave $24 billion in incentive payments to doctors for computerization, should have done that. The Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology said that it was a "top priority" and just recently wrote a 10-year vision statement and agenda for it.

4 of 240 comments (clear)

  1. It's time to fine. by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 5, Informative

    Working with EMR systems for small clinics has shown me that unless fines are given out to these companies developing this software they will make it as difficult and expensive to exchange records with different systems as possible. It is far more profitable for them to make it hard to exchange and then make their clients convince other offices to use the same software if they want to make it easy.

  2. Re:HL7? by Empiric · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The primary purpose of HL7 seemed to be enabling massive consulting hours clarifying the poorly-defined HL7 standard.

    HIPAA is like HL7 version 2.0. They've dispensed with "poorly-defined" and moved up to "completely arbitrary". The boon this provides... for lawyers... cannot be underestimated.

    --
    ~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
  3. GOOD by Charliemopps · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I live in Madison, Right next to Epic actually. Pretty much all medical facilities in the area use them of course.

    The problem is, every time I go into the doctor they tell me about how they can now pull in all my medical history from every other system. It's so great! Yay! The doctors are sooo giddy and I roll my eyes because I know what's coming...

    So according to this you have Herpes... no? Strange...
    And multiphasic drug abuse? No?
    Open heart surgery? Really? No?

    and on an on it goes.
    EVERY time I go in, all that stuff shows up under my name. No, I do not have a common name like John smith. My real name is very unique. Yet, records that have nothing to do with me get pulled in every time. But the only data transferred is the diagnoses. There is no info on where the data came from, when it happened... nothing. I'm pretty sure I'd remember heart surgery or herpes.

    People lie about their names at hospitals all the time to avoid billing, law enforcement, etc... I suspect that's what happened to me. I had a rather unsavory roommate in college. But since the system lacks all detail of the event, I cannot even get it removed. This needs to die... and die theroughly. I should get to chose which records are kept about my health.

  4. Judith Faulkner by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ah, yes, Judith Faulkner:

    http://dailysignal.com/2011/08...

    A major donor to the Democratic Party has received favorable treatment from the Obama administration, including a choice appointment to a federal advisory committee, and lavish praise from the president himself.

    Yet health information technology vendor Epic Systems Corp. opposes a key administration position on health IT. Its founder, Judith Faulkner, has spoken out on numerous occasions against “interoperability” in electronic medical records technology.

    So why was Faulkner appointed to a 13-member panel charged with recommending how $19 billion in stimulus money be spent? One can’t help but notice that Faulkner and other epic employees have given nearly $300,000 to Democrats since 2006.

    Read the rest of it.