Why Doctors Reject Tools That Make Their Jobs Easier

Re:Why Doctors Reject Tools That Make Their Jobs Easier by yellowapple on Monday October 15, 2018 @09:01PM (#18225548)

And of course "just hook into the EMR" is fraught with problems as it is, what with HL7 quirks and proprietary APIs and homegrown interfaces and all that jazz.

Even "better" when there's no concept of "the EMR". My foray into healthcare IT was at a hospital/clinic district that used no less than 4 EMR systems (one new and one legacy for the main two hospitals, plus one new and one legacy for all the satellite clinics). That's not including the specialized systems for ER, Oncology, Obstetrics/Gynecology...

All for the pursuit of Meaningless Use.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Doctors Reject Tools That Make Their Jobs Easier by conanbatt on Tuesday October 16, 2018 @01:13AM (#18226727)

Yes, its a mess. And its because none of them work for the specific use cases very well. For all the things told about it, EPIC is still the best out there.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Doctors Reject Tools That Make Their Jobs Easier by yellowapple on Tuesday October 16, 2018 @10:32PM (#18235627)

Indeed it is, though that ain't really saying much. EPIC was one of the ones in the "new" category for us (for the satellite clinics specifically; the actual hospitals instead went with CPSI - aka "COBOL, Perl, and Server Issues"). It was definitely the least bad of all the EMRs and EMR-like systems we used.

[ Parent | on HN ]