Live data from Hacker News

Everyone hates the electronic medical record

logicmag.io

211–220 of 343 posts

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#211
post #49

I created the ClearHealth/HealthCloud open source (GPL) EMR which to my knowledge is the only open source one to receive full federal certification. Operations (not surgery) are so incredibly bad / incompetent in most healthcare settings that software frequently gets the blame for much deeper problems. This article is a doctors perspective on how software did not fix a completely broken workflow. I don't begrudge him…

> In-N-Out instead of McDonalds

Whenever I make this analogy here people jump in to say how much better McDonalds is :(

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

McDonald’s menu is enormous, much larger than In n Out. If you’ve ever worked in the quick service food industry (it sounds like you haven’t), you’d know this considerably affects how every facet of the restaurant functions. I also completely disagree that In n Out is “dramatically better” and I’d be very surprised if that was the resounding opinion across Americans. It is fine, but again, it serves a different purpo…

In-n-Out tastes basically like McDonalds. I don’t understand the people who rave about it. There’s very little difference other than the fact that they have a “secret” menu with their own coded language.

You should eat more junk food ;)

I’ve been to both good and bad McDonalds. Burgers and fries from well-run ones can taste very good. In-n-Out has better consistency, and it’s on par with the quality of well-run McDonalds. It’s probably due to the fact that In-n-out has fewer items? I don’t know.

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#213
post #49

I created the ClearHealth/HealthCloud open source (GPL) EMR which to my knowledge is the only open source one to receive full federal certification. Operations (not surgery) are so incredibly bad / incompetent in most healthcare settings that software frequently gets the blame for much deeper problems. This article is a doctors perspective on how software did not fix a completely broken workflow. I don't begrudge him…

> In-N-Out instead of McDonalds Whenever I make this analogy here people jump in to say how much better McDonalds is :(

Make a less divisive or controversial analogy then. If people are getting hung up on the analogy and not focusing on the point you’re making, you’re making a bad analogy.

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#214
post #101

My first job out of college was working at Epic Systems as a mostly Windows sysadmin. It was a fascinating (and great!) experience. I've never seen such an advanced Windows sysadmin setup before. I only briefly touched upon EMRs and the MUMPS/Cache stuff they did there. However, I also learned PowerShell to a much deeper level than probably 99% of Linux folks ever do. We did TDD, code review, CI/CD pipelines for fuck…

The reason why we use Bash on Linux is because it’s ubiquitous. Even though my terminal is ZSH, all my scripts will be Bash because I can trust it to run on any system. Same goes for Windows, I want to make sure those scripts can be run without having to install anything. Powershell is there, and it’s powerful. I’ve got a job to do, and a problem to solve.

Python is better for anything complicated. Even though Bash is ubiquitous, it's kind of a pain in the ass, and it's actually not that portable since there is no real "standard library", and everything basically depends on system tools being installed and/or configured in a particular way.

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people want to waive that privacy concern. My email provider has access to tons of my private data including lots of health data. Given the option, I suspect many would prefer to just get an email.

In the US, that's a HIPAA violation, which opens the provider up to massive fines.

No, it's absolutely is not a HIPAA violation if the patient requests email communication. But it's a common myth.

A patient can consent to receive protected health information over email or other unsecured channels as long as they are informed of the risks and consent anyways. Patients are allowed to communicate about their own health to whoever they want to in whatever manner they want.

For example - the American Academy of Family Physicians has the following to say about it - https://www.aafp.org/pubs/fpm/blogs/inpractice/entry/hipaa_m...

Myth 3: HIPAA prohibits email communication with patients about clinical matters.

Fact: You can send protected health information by email, but you must implement safeguards under the security rule to ensure the information is secure, accessed only by authorized individuals, and not altered, edited, or deleted. The best way to do this is to encrypt your emails; however, patients have the right to request access to their own information via unencrypted email. You may send patient information by unencrypted email if you have advised the patient of the risks and the patient still prefers unencrypted email.

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#216
My time to shine. I work in the healthcare industry as an analyst and deal with all types of EMRs, Databases, and Molecular profiles. Before working in the healthcare industry, I would have assumed that the data quality in healthcare would be higher because you know, data quality errors can negatively effect patient outcomes. This is not the case.

A lot of these issue lie (lay?) with the UI of these systems. They are just not intuitive. This causes data to be entered incorrectly as honest mistakes. There are also fields which are free text, which should not be. I can't count how many times, I received data from a free text field for drugs, for example, and instead of information about drugs it said "The patient's pet passed away and they were sad today".

Furthermore, a lot of the data comes in separated value files, mostly CSVS (though I try to have them use TSVs if they can modify it). For such a ubiquitous format, at the volumes of data we receive, we get issues with the CSVs all the time. Lots of fields have strings that are improperly quoted, newlines in the strings, variable amount of fields per line, the usual.

That's on top of encoding issues. Randomly we will get files that aren't utf-8 and our parsers will blow up, and then we have to go back to the vendor and ask them to regenerate the data. Also trying to harmonize data across a bunch of proprietary file formats, and software is terrible

Also physicians and nurses are generally pretty skeptical when it comes to new technology even if you have a good product, and for good reason. They have been BURNED many times but companies coming in and promising the world, and delivering a half baked product. Anyone can get an MVP together quickly that kind of does what they need done, but to really support end users requires a lot more investment. I'm talking on-site trainings, software engineers actually watching the faculty USING THE TOOL, and taking notes when they struggle, being proactive about the wants and needs of the staff instead of adding features that seem useful. This almost never happens

Then there are factors outside of just EMRS and the user experience that just make the patient experience much more difficult, even when everyone involved is following standard practices. Data is king in this space, and companies are reticent to share it without lots of money and an books worth of clauses and agreements. You can win in this space just by having more data, or rare data. Lots of patient populations for obscure diseases require large sample sizes before you will have enough patients to perform a study. Pharma companies will approach you with prospective studies and the more data you have the more feasibility work you do that end up leading to studies where you get paid, and your name on paper. This HURTS patients and does nothing but help to keep competitive advantages.

On the bright side, since the U.S healthcare system is so capitalistic, we can usually find what we need coded in the billing data, because patients are nickle and dimed for everything that happens at a medical facility.

I have about twenty more pages of things I could talk about. This whole system is terrible and it doesn't have to be. On a more positive note, I love being able to track patient outcomes and see them improving, and I really enjoy working with huge datasets.

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am such dev. It’s not up to us. It’s up to our management. We would love to engineer good quality EMR, but upper management wouldn’t let us.

That, my friend, sounds a lot like The Cat Ate My Source Code [The Pragmatic Programmer] Price, lead time, quality, (and scope) — pick any two. When the stakes are high, don't rely on your manager to pick quality — that is your responsibility. And if you can't convince your "boss" to give you enough time to deliver something that meets your bar, quit.

And then we have about 90% of working sw devs quit tomorrow - it sounds great but people are not going to leave when they know the next place is basically the exact same.

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#218
post #180
post #49

I created the ClearHealth/HealthCloud open source (GPL) EMR which to my knowledge is the only open source one to receive full federal certification. Operations (not surgery) are so incredibly bad / incompetent in most healthcare settings that software frequently gets the blame for much deeper problems. This article is a doctors perspective on how software did not fix a completely broken workflow. I don't begrudge him…

Idk this reads like apologetics for the software industry, which I know people will be more sympathetic to here. But. I know doctors that tell me their EMR log them out after a minute of inactivity and take 3 minutes to login. This can happen multiple times during a patient visit and are totally disruptive. I've heard that it's even begun to affect the throughput of the hospital. So I wouldn't be so dismissive of doc…

This is entirely a data security issue. Depending on the environment, without a logout this is seriously risking a HIPAA violation. Say you're in the hospital and your doctor pulls up your record on a computer in the hallway after they've done rounds on you to put in their observations and notes. However just as he's finishing, his pager goes off, he's off to an emergency, and he forgets to log off.

How many minutes are you okay with your medical record being open for inspection by anyone that walks by? Other medical staff, admin staff, janitorial staff, other patients getting steps in, other patient's families?

It's one of many instances where there's a valid reason for the technology to be implemented as such but since doctors usually aren't thinking about the technology or security aspects they just perceive it as annoying.

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#219

Disclaimer - I work for a health service that isn't in the USA and has a very extensive EMR. I don't disagree. I started my career dealing with paper folders of records that were fastidiously organised by a team that made sense of them. Now everything is electronic and fucking _everywhere_. The work didn't go away - but giving everyone a computer made it everyone's problem and nobody's job. A really good EMR (or othe…

Same disclaimer: not in the US. From the other side of the table, as patients that were very regularly ill and bouncing between medical professionals, EMR were a godsend. For instance in vacation at the other end of the country, we lost an Anapen with a luggage mishanded at the station, though we had a spare but we actually didn't (was in the same bag...). We went to the closest doctor, showed the insurance card and…

The problem is that in the US, many EMR's don't automatically connect to each other.

If you're going from a hospital owned by one chain (say, Hospital Corporation of America) to another hospital owned by the same corporation, then yes, it works like you said and doctors have access to your historical data. But God forbid that you should ever end up at a hospital owned by a different corporation, because then you have to call the Medical Records department to release the data, which often takes a couple business days to go through. The system doesn't work if it isn't open, and unfortunately, our patient privacy law (HIPAA) is often used by corporations as an excuse to silo their data away and prevent others from accessing it.

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may jest but I wouldn't mind this model. i.e. Records are under a digital lock to which I hold the key, and can grant access to a medical professional service provider for a period of time with set access expiry. Written records at least provided some physical locality that made me feel less at risk, and it was also easy for me to ask for a photocopy for my own records (I'm surprised how many people just entrust…

the issue arises when you are unconcious and there are certain risks to treating you the staff needs to know about. Maybe your throat closes for benedryl but you're showing obvious signs of an allergy? Maybe you have a pre-existing condition which gives you symptoms that signal a stroke? the risk is always going to be there

They don't need my full medical history for that. Just a highlights or "in case of emergency" summary.

Humans dealt with these issues just fine before records were centralized. And still do e.g. when I travel to another jurisdiction. Being an engaged and proactive actor in my recordkeeping actually improves my posture.

I deal with the same issues when it comes to estate planning (e.g. what happens if I become unable to make decisions for myself). There are tactics and contingencies available (like trusted individuals, powers of attorney, etc) and I don't need my full financial background to be openly available to thousands of participants in the system to accommodate. Society and the concept of trust did not evolve over millions of years to end up becoming nothing more than an individual and a computer somewhere in the cloud.

Post reply on HN