Check this out. What you will see is not the quick blog post that I usually send you to for a quick burst of profundity. Nope. This is a rather extensive and well written New Yorker article that sets out to answer this important question. Read it! Although the article goes on for pages, its message is summarized in one great quote:
“…three years later I’ve come to feel that a system that promised to increase my mastery over my work has, instead, increased my work’s mastery over me.”
Several important points are made here. First, physicians thoroughly understand that digitization is necessary to support medical care in 2018 and beyond. AND. They are clearly among the most tech savvy of all professions. So, what’s the problem?
As you read over these pages, the answer here becomes painfully clear. Doctors believe, and apparently rightfully so, that these systems are designed without taking into consideration the contextin which the physician works. What used to be done in just a few keystrokes now requires many. Interfaces are built based on “political” concerns, rather than “technical.” The costs involved in setting up a computer system like the one described here are huge. In the $Billions. AND. The quantity and quality of the medical care being delivered actually decrease substantially while the practitioners wrestle with the new software.
Bottom Line. Funny. Sort of. We live in a world that increasingly wants to compensate physicians based on “quality of care” and “outcomes,” yet we foist computer systems like this on them.
Not fair!
