Computerized Health Records

DP: What’s the downside of paper?

DB: It doesn’t capitalize on the tremendous power of computers, which have transformed the use of information in every other part of our lives, business and travel and leisure.

…

DP: Where do we stand relative to other countries?

DB: Most other countries have much more use of electronic health records than we do.

…

DP: How is all of this supposed to bring down medical costs?

…. So I avoided giving the patient a dose of radiation that he didn’t need. I avoided the expense of that test. And I got the information sooner.

DP: And how much does it cost? For, say, one doctor?

DB: On average, the cost is between $40,000 and $50,000, of which about a third is the software and the hardware, about a third is the cost of getting it set up in the office, and about a third is maintaining it. …

DP: I’m sure you hear this at the cocktail parties all the time: “What about my privacy?”

….

But people on my Medical Informatics list are leery of this.  That is, it sounds like a nice idea, but has a lot of issues both from the technological point of view and usability, in addition to privacy and the others. There is some discussion of this at NEJM and AMIA

Right now, the carriers continue to enjoy their billion-dollar scam only because we’re not organized enough to do anything about it. But it doesn’t have to be this way. You don’t have to sit there, waiting to leave your message, listening to a speech recorded by a third-grade teacher on Ambien.

Let’s push back, and hard. We want those time-wasting, money-leaking messages eliminated, or at least made optional.

via From the Desk of David Pogue – Take Back the Beep Campaign – NYTimes.com.

I’m not sure that David Pogue is right about the amount of money made by adding that 15 seconds of airtime (since billing is by minute, not by second), but I agree that it is both annoying and that its purpose is to increase revenue.  I wrote in to Verizon about it.  He makes a good point:  We know what to do at the beep, so why do we need the message?

DOUBLE BILLING In Europe, you’re billed only when you place a cellphone call — not when you answer one. And you’re billed only when you send a text message — not when you get one. In this country, that’s how it’s always been for landlines, too.

Somehow, though, we’ve let the cellphone industry get into the habit of billing both of us. When I call you, a chat that eats up 10 minutes of my airtime allowance also eats up 10 minutes of yours. A text message that costs me 20 cents also costs you 20 cents.

Hello, Senator?

via State of the Art – Cellphone Gripes Worthy of Congress’s Time – NYTimes.com.

This and text message fees are two of my pet peeves. (However, years ago I thought the reasoning for this was that the setting up of the line to the receiving cellphone required more resources than a comparable landline.  That being said, Europe has made receiving calls free for some time, though I think outgoing calls are more expensive.)

See Verizon’s response to this article.