Guest Author: Health Care Worker

As a healthcare provider, the topics discussed in this Technology Blog ring true for the most part. I would like to address a few key points posted on this blog. Without question, having an electronic medical record keeping system that is universal would be ideal for all of the reasons stated by the authors here. However, from recent experience in my own medical center, I have learned that the transition to an electronic system is not without its drawbacks. In May of 2009, my large facility made the transition to electronic medical record keeping. The cost of doing so is astronomical, estimated at 12 million dollars…and that’s just for the technology and support. The endless hours spent by healthcare providers to learn how to use the new system added substantially more. There was much frustration among the doctors and nurses who were trying to find ways to chart things, but it often times was like fitting a round peg in a square hole. Getting customized reports is a challenge as well, vs. the pre-configured reports the system is programmed to generate. Flexibility is the biggest drawback of electronic charting, along with the ability of older healthcare providers to manage the computer technology (vs. younger providers who were raised on technology). On the subject of scanning and treatment technology advances, the more the better! The problem is that our healthcare industry is profit-based…based on capitalism. Companies that conduct research and develop such technologies want to make money on their products, and don’t want to be told (by government) how much they are going to be paid for its use. This is the primary disconnect in trying to use technology to lower healthcare costs. The government’s wiliness to step in and mandate fee caps has been minimal, in fear of suppressing competition and development. Its much the same in the Pharmaceutical industry…people can’t afford medications because the drug companies want to make the most money they can on what they invent. On the subject of access, clearly, those without health insurance at all place a huge burden on society and the healthcare providers themselves. Medicare reimbursement rates are dismal in the Midwest, but the cost of healthcare is still pretty high. Universal healthcare is a bad word these days in many circles, but unless there is some sort of acceptable baseline healthcare for everyone, hospitals will continue to lay off workers or keep reducing the quality of the personnel/care provided to save money and survive. This is especially true in the “critical access” hospitals of the rural states…some only have 25 beds. This means they cannot purchase expensive, cutting edge technology to keep up with other institutions, or pay the salaries of top notch healthcare providers…so they go practice somewhere else. Finally, the blog’s point about tort reform is right on. Healthcare providers make mistakes…they are human, not machines. Lawsuits drive the practice of medicine, and are responsible for medically unjustified procedures and tests in every hospital in every state. People should be held responsible for their mistakes, but plaintiff/punitive awards are out of control. FEMA estimated the average value of a human life lost during Hurricane Katrina at roughly $5.7 million dollars. If FEMA can do it, so can others.