December 10th, 2007
Who will mandate electronic health records?
There’s a race on to mandate electronic health records. (Picture from Medical Informatics Insider.)
Insurers, politicians and hospitals are all piling on the pressure to make the investment. An AMA story this week describes the pressure. Some doctors are retiring rather than automate.
In theory this is a very good thing. The benefits of automation seem clear.
So, too, are the costs.
All this has many doctors feeling like Scrooge this holiday season.
Many practices have tried automation and failed due to incompatible technology. Others worry that current systems are incompatible with what the hospital or insurer is demanding Others can’t understand the contract they’re being told to sign.
And who is it who should be making this big investment? Doctors do not feel they are the primary beneficiaries of automated health records — patients, insurers, and hospitals all benefit. So who pays?
And if the government is going to step in during 2009 and mandate automation, shouldn’t we wait to consider the standards they will insist upon? The AMA wants tax credits before it calls for its members to move.
Medical automation is at the bottom of demand’s S-curve, ready to power through the mass market, but without the established product or standards leadership most technical markets have when they reach this point.
Microsoft just came in, for gosh sakes!
Who will take financial responsibility if, or rather when, it’s decided you bought the wrong system, 2-3 years from now?
These are all questions crying out for answers before five-and-six figure contracts are signed by medical offices.
Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist since 1978, and has covered technology since 1982. He launched the Interactive Age Daily, the first daily coverage of the Internet to launch with a magazine, in September 1994. See his full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.
Subscribe to ZDNet Healthcare via Email alerts or RSS.
| 12/11/07
