I've been a medical transcriptionist (a transcriber is the machine, a transcriptionist is the person who uses the machine) for the last 10 years. I've worked in private practices, hospitals, and currently work at home for one of the largest health care facilities in my state. I have never liked the idea of sending transcription overseas on many different levels.
First, it does jeopardize the security of a patient's confidential medical record. However, that confidentiality could be in jeopardy even if Susie the neighbor had transcribed it, maybe even more so because it's on a more personal level.
Second, many people try to say that there is a lack of qualified, educated MTs in the US. That is a bunch of schitt de bulle. There are too many qualified, educated MTs in the US, to the point that they're forced to underbid each other trying to get contracts.
Third, the whole cost savings issue is a real thorn in my side. These offshore MTs are charging as low as 3 cents per line whereas the typical American MT can and does charge up to 15 cents a line. That doesn't sound like a whole lot to many, but when you consider that MTs are likely extensively using word expanders, macros, and VR, it's sometimes the equivalent of $30 to $40 an hour when it's a production-based account. Foreign MTs are NOT saving these hospitals, clinics, etc., any money because typically the majority of their work has to be checked and corrected by a quality assurance monitor here in the US. So, in essence, the work of one American MT is being done by one foreign MT and one American QA monitor. Where's the savings in that??
There is a huge issue with HIPAA compliance amongst American MTs. We've had this drilled into our heads for the last 3 years or so; we screw up, we're out of a job. However, the HIPAA laws do not pertain whatsoever to offshore MTs, only to their employers. Is this fair? Absolutely not. Is there anything US MTs can do about it? Absolutely not.
The one organization that claims to represent MTs, AAMT (American Association for Medical Transcriptionists) has no stand on offshore transcription. On the other hand, they offer CMT testing and credentialing to foreign MTs. They're also now talking about enforcing some sort of statewide credentialing and testing program throughout the country. In other words, you can live in Michigan but if you work for a company out of Tennessee, you will most likely have to meet licensing standards in both states, also likely to be at the total expense of the MT. Again, this will not pertain to offshore MTs.
What is my stance on foreign subcontractors? I don't like it. Until it is made public knowledge to American patients as a whole, instead of snippets in MT forums and geek zines, it's a moot issue. People do not know this is going on, but I betcha if they did, there would be some changes, hopefully for the positive.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been a medical transcriptionist (a transcriber is the machine, a transcriptionist is the person who uses the machine) for the last 10 years. I've worked in private practices, hospitals, and currently work at home for one of the largest health care facilities in my state. I have never liked the idea of sending transcription overseas on many different levels. First, it does jeopardize the security of a patient's confidential medical record. However, that confidentiality could be in jeopardy even if Susie the neighbor had transcribed it, maybe even more so because it's on a more personal level. Second, many people try to say that there is a lack of qualified, educated MTs in the US. That is a bunch of schitt de bulle. There are too many qualified, educated MTs in the US, to the point that they're forced to underbid each other trying to get contracts. Third, the whole cost savings issue is a real thorn in my side. These offshore MTs are charging as low as 3 cents per line whereas the typical American MT can and does charge up to 15 cents a line. That doesn't sound like a whole lot to many, but when you consider that MTs are likely extensively using word expanders, macros, and VR, it's sometimes the equivalent of $30 to $40 an hour when it's a production-based account. Foreign MTs are NOT saving these hospitals, clinics, etc., any money because typically the majority of their work has to be checked and corrected by a quality assurance monitor here in the US. So, in essence, the work of one American MT is being done by one foreign MT and one American QA monitor. Where's the savings in that?? There is a huge issue with HIPAA compliance amongst American MTs. We've had this drilled into our heads for the last 3 years or so; we screw up, we're out of a job. However, the HIPAA laws do not pertain whatsoever to offshore MTs, only to their employers. Is this fair? Absolutely not. Is there anything US MTs can do about it? Absolutely not. The one organization that claims to represent MTs, AAMT (American Association for Medical Transcriptionists) has no stand on offshore transcription. On the other hand, they offer CMT testing and credentialing to foreign MTs. They're also now talking about enforcing some sort of statewide credentialing and testing program throughout the country. In other words, you can live in Michigan but if you work for a company out of Tennessee, you will most likely have to meet licensing standards in both states, also likely to be at the total expense of the MT. Again, this will not pertain to offshore MTs. What is my stance on foreign subcontractors? I don't like it. Until it is made public knowledge to American patients as a whole, instead of snippets in MT forums and geek zines, it's a moot issue. People do not know this is going on, but I betcha if they did, there would be some changes, hopefully for the positive.