Live data from Hacker News

Everyone hates the electronic medical record

logicmag.io

191–200 of 343 posts

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's malice on the sell side. If they can't integrate a trial period then its not worth attempting. Its dumb terminal work not like its actually expensive just very very lucrative because its run like a mafia.

Exactly, when selling a big software system like this to the government, the contractor will very deliberately ensure that it follows the requirements exactly (because requirements are never specific enough) so that the government will then have to go back to them for fixes and upgrades forever. If they see a poorly worded requirement that they can implement as-is knowing it will cause a problem, they celebrate becau…

The reality is much more mundane.

If they don’t implement that poorly worded requirement, they are entering a world of pain of having to justify the deviation through 10 layers of project managers and qa, all from different organisations (either customer or other contractors). And at the end they’ll be the troublemakers who delayed the milestone

So why bother?

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Operations (not surgery) are so incredibly bad / incompetent in most healthcare settings that software frequently gets the blame for much deeper problems." "In my experience doctors are a tremendous barrier to resolving problems in healthcare operations," I'm a hospital-based physician that works in a system with great operations and results. The physicians, nurses and other staff work amicably together. Management…

I know that devs that work on EMRs might read this thread. I'm pleading with you to take the EMR to the next level when it comes to UI/UX and reliability.

If the new EMR (or any other IT system) doesn’t look exactly like the old one, everyone will drag their feet switching to it

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#193
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…

This was my experience trying to create technology in the real estate world. Realtors are the same way.

It’s the reality for anyone doing “IT”, whatever the domain. Travel, banking, hospitals, police, social security etc ad nauseam

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#194
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…

I very much doubt it’s the software vendor who has chosen to implement the automatic logout after a minute. Most probably someone wrote that down in a requirement because that’s how the previous system worked or that’s what they saw on the internet, and once that’s done it’s set in stone

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#196
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe this article is only about this specific system. The problem is that the name of the system is "Electronic Medical Record", which makes the article sound like all such systems are hated.

I don't think that's the case. AFAIK there's no such system. The article specifically reference Epic, which is one of the biggest (_the_ biggest?) EHR software company in the US. My wife used it as a nurse and I've watched my own providers struggle with it. It sucks.

Saying “it sucks” is like saying “SAP sucks”. Whatever system you get out of one of these projects is 99% dependent on the project team (on both sides), and 1% on the product base, which is invariably “meh”

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#197

I wrote a thesis on EHR's 7 years ago. They really haven't seemed to improve much. I personally think a big part of the issue is actually scope, these systems are expected to do everything - medical notes, script ordering, appointment management, billing of course, and 3000 other things. This weirdly leads to a distribution problem, you can't be a serious competitor in just one area, you have to do everything. Only t…

This is very true. There several reasons why most EHRs are so bad: 1) The people who pay generally do not use the system. This is true for enterprise software in general and leads to vendors prioritizing having all features organizations ask for (regardless if they are a good idea or not) and also prioritizing features management deems important over fundamental workflow, UX and polish in general. 2) EHRs are very la…

I would add the point that these dynamics are also present for any large IT system. Just search for people having issues migrating to SAP or Amadeus or whatever

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#198
When you craft a solution around the needs of users, soliciting their feedback, then they might end up with something they appreciate.

When you force a solution on people and give them no say in the matter, then there’s a good chance they’re not going to like it.

Instructive case that reveals a lot about Soviet America.

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#199
I thought this was an excellent, excellent read. This post, about how well-meaning legislation to increase EMR usage had some strong negative unintended consequences, dovetailed with thoughts I've had a lot recently about the concept of "bullshit jobs" (a popular discussion topic on HN). I've wondered what the true source is for these bullshit jobs. After all, corporations voraciously want to increase profits, which should be a strong incentive to eliminate unnecessary jobs.

The conclusion I've come to is that the side effects of government laws and regulations lead to a negative "codependent relationship" between government and companies that exist to implement the complexity required by the regulations. There is no incentive on either side to reduce complexity. To be clear, I am not blanket "anti regulation", and I've seen the benefits of strong (usually simple) regulations - for example, I live in Texas (usually famously anti-regulation), and there is good evidence that old laws restricting home equity loans, due to an old animosity of Texas farmers against bankers, helped uniquely limit the damage of the Great Recession in Texas: https://www.aeaweb.org/research/charts/texas-home-equity-lim....

However, I've also seen the damage and useless work created by well-meaning regulations that create a lot of complexity, and then companies spring up to "tame that complexity". For example, most people in the US are familiar with FSAs, flexible spending accounts. There is a HUGE amount of work that goes into managing FSAs. The rules around what is a qualified expense are complex, and lots of companies have sprung up trying to work around those rules (e.g. companies that will churn out a "medical letter of necessity" for any massage you want). And all FSAs do is let you save taxes on medical expenses. But since FSA money is "use it or lose it", it turns out that 23% of the funds go unused every year! So all this complexity was created to save consumers money, but at the end of the day it ends up being (in aggregate) basically a total wash! All we've gotten is tons of administrators and companies that are paid to manage that total wash.

I don't have a great solution, as again, I don't see incentives on either side to reduce complexity. But more and more "tear down the whole f'ing system" is the only answer I see.

Re: Everyone hates the electronic medical record

#200
post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the nature of EHR systems, it's just not realistic to have trial periods, because everything in a hospital is interdependent. Even the relatively small system I worked on did everything from billing, accounting, insurance, HR, inventory management, scheduling, integrations with medical equipment & third parties (e.g. national health systems) with per-speciality workflows and other automation. Most of it isn't e…

> none of the big players are incentivized to make it possible Yea this is the problem. When well meaning startups attempt to make change they get acquired by a piece of shit sales behemoth. If somehow one could resist the acquisition and just eat everybodies lunch we'd all be better off.

The only way change will come is if some actually independent hospital develops open-source in-house software (under the strongest possible non-cooption license available, likely GPL3) over literal decades until it becomes a standard.

It’ll be fought every step by the entire healthcare industry.

Post reply on HN