Tuesday, September 13, 2016
Accelerating
IT Adoption Among Clinicians: The Fundamentals
Two New England
Journal of Medicine articles inspire this blog.
·
“Counting Better – The Limits and Future of
Quality-Based Compensation, “ by Christopher Dale, MD, Michael Myint, MD, and
Amy Compton-Phillips, MD, of Swedish Health Services, in Seattle., August 18,
2006. The authors speak for the Swedish
Medical Group, a 1200 multispecialty group, which is having troubles redesigned
a compensation package that does not rob
“clinicians from the joy and meaning of partnering with patients to create
health ‘ by relying too much on performance metrics.
·
“Accelerating Innovation in Health IT,” by
Robert Rud, PhD, David Bates, MD, and
Calum MacRae, PhD, or RAND and various Harvard-based Harvard
organization, September 1, 2016. The
authors comment on lag in health IT, on physician dissatisfaction with EHRs, on
the disconnect between IT developers and clinicians, and how to bridge the disconnect –
involvement of multidisciplinary teams, focusing on users’ needs, redesigning care processes, having the freedom to experiment and fail
quickly.=
Accelerating Adoption may be even more fundamental than
that, by asking what clinicians need and
are already doing.
What every clinician needs – 1) the patient’s demographics and chief complaint
and medical history; and 2) what most clinicians already collects – the patient’s
weight and height, vital signs, and
basic laboratory information.
Computer Interview
The former could be provided by the patient in computer
interview conducted at the patient’s
home computer or in a waiting room and
processed by an existing clinical algorithm ( the commercially available “The
Instant Medical History” is an example), and this could be combined with the
vital signs, to produce a narrative history and rudimentary differential
diagnostic summary available when the patient enters the examination or
interview room. This can save the
doctor as many as 6 to 7 minutes for each patient encounter.
Merits of Computer Interview
This approach has these merits; 1) the patient’s time, not the clinician’s
time, is involved in producing the basic
information; 2) the clinicians can
quickly focus on the basic clinical problem,
giving the clinician extra time
to see more patients; 3) the relevant
information can be used to generate a proper code and to use in case a referral
letter is required.
As the authors comment, “There is an insatiable demand for
new, useful, user-friendly IT functionality.”
Current electronic heath record models for the most part are not-user friendly and are
often developed by soft-war experts who have never set foot in a busy doctor’s
office who is struggling to make ends meet.
“Emerging provider-payment models must “seek tools to help reduce costs
and improve quality.’ Only then will “IT-enabled
transformations… might finally come to health care.”
References
1.
Friedberg, et;
“Factors Affecting Physician Performance Satisfaction and Their Implications for Patient Care, Health
Systems, and Health Policy,” Santa Monica, CA, RAND, 2013.
2.
Ratwani, RM, et al: “ Electronic Health Record Usability;
Analysis of Use-Centered Design Processes of Eleven Health Record Vendors, J Am Med Inform Assoc,
2015:22:1179-1182.
3.
Jones, SS, et al: “Unraveling the IT
Productivity Paradox: Lessons for Health Care,” N Engl J Medicine, 2012: 366:223-5.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment