We all had the experience of walking into the doctor’s office and someone tells you to fill out a form. It seems to happen at every single visit. Digitalizing patient information can help by cutting down on paper documents stored by the hospital and the ease at which patient information can be brought up. The federal government has been offering incentives for physicians and hospitals that go digital. Many hospitals have digitalized a portion of their documents but newer and upgraded systems are necessary for hospitals to qualify for federal incentives. Also, there is hesitation by the physicians themselves. One physician, Plotsky, claims that the switch costs too much even with the federal incentives. He also does not know which system to chose, how to install it and how to transition into digitalized information. Since many feel this way, the switch to paperless has been slow. Though the federal government has offered incentives, it is also sending mixed messages. Approximately fifty thousand physicians and nurses are eligible for the federal incentives that were part of the 2009 economic stimulus package. There are two bills that proposed those payments be made out by the unused stimulus money but this is likely to be shot down by the Democrats and President Obama. This mixed message from the federal government is adding to the hesitation to go paperless.
One other concern is how whether it is safe to go paperless. Putting patient information onto a computer system puts it at risk of hacking. Doctors looking for cash incentives are suppose to use data systems that are able to be encrypted. But the federal government does not have a clear requirement and there is no way to differential between the physicians that do and do not use systems that are able to be encrypted.
At the moment, the federal government does not seem clear on what they want physicians, nurses and hospitals to do. Obviously they are fore going digital but they need to set clear guidelines and set a standard for physicians and hospitals to follow. The benefits may exceed the costs but it is not apparent. I feel that the federal government should not be pressuring physicians and hospitals to go paperless when they can only offer incentives and no clear and helpful guidelines to make the switch. What do you think?
3 comments:
I think that going paperless will definitely make it easier for doctor offices in terms of helping them become more organized, but there's a bigger problem with keeping all the information on a computer. Like Ayaka mentioned, someone can hack into the system and take the information, or a virus might infect the computer. Also, all the information could be erased accidentally and then patients would need to give all the information to the doctor again. It would be very troublesome.
I don't think the government is lacking clear standards at all. The federal incentives come with a list of criteria that define the recommended switch to paperless, and the article mentions help centers (and links to one) which doctors can go to for information and assistance.
However, practical concerns still make this, like any transition, difficult. Like many others, this should be more of an all-or-nothing thing; as more people switch to electronic records, the systems will become more refined and fix peoples' concerns over them. However, if most remain hesitant, then it will continue to seem like an unworthwhile option.
I support Obama in vetoing attempts to cut money from this project; if it goes through, it will definitely save money and show benefits in the long run, despite the immediate cost.
Sure going paperless would probably be a good thing, but I disagree with the fact that healthcare got a subsidy just to make that switch is a waste of money. We don't have money to be throwing around like tis for something that to me (and solely based on the facts I'm reading from this post) seems like a frivolous expenditure: one that we can live without.
Post a Comment