Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all | TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
tigerskin
LSU Fan
Member since Nov 2004
9665 posts

Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all



Not to mention all the kickbacks involved in buying the electronic records. Shocking. Something the government thought would save money but it actually doesn't.

LINK







Back to top
Share:
eelsuee
LSU Fan
2B+!2B
Member since Oct 2004
3973 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


I am glad this came from the NYT, otherwise liberals would be all over this thread attacking the source and ignoring the details.





Back to top
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
5508 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


Big kick back to GE is all that was.





Back to top
GoT1de
Alabama Fan
Alabama
Member since Aug 2009
785 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


quote:

Something the government thought would work but it actually doesn't


"But...but...but..."
- VP Joe Biden






Back to top
  Replies (0)
tigerskin
LSU Fan
Member since Nov 2004
9665 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


Speaking of kickbacks, labs are allowed to buy the electronic record system for doctor offices. Then where do you think that doctor is going to send his lab work???? Unbelievable "legal" kickback scam. But our government put in an exception to basically allow that kickback that is completely illegal in every other facet of business. So we allowed illegal activity so that it "just gets done." Now we find out, it doesn't even save money.


This post was edited on 1/11 at 10:58 am


Back to top
Diamondawg
Mississippi St. Fan
Mississippi
Member since Oct 2006
11050 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


quote:

Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all
The last 12 years of my career were spent in the healthcare technology arena. I retired from an academic health science campus and went to a work for a large, international healthcare technology company. As I traveled around the country helping hospitals build, install and support these systems, very few (I would say one in a hundred) hospitals were anywhere near having the infrastructure to come anywhere near being able to realize real savings from a true and complete electronic medical record. The potential savings are there. Unfortunately, the cost is enormous and the savings (for our country) are years and years away - I don't care what anyone in the White House tells you.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Lucas Jackson
Tulane Fan
Member since Jun 2012
316 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


Good thing I bought stock in BMC Group last summer!







Back to top
  Replies (0)
tiger1014
LSU Fan
Member since Jan 2011
10359 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


Electronic records are a huge initial investment and have a very steep initial time cost and learning curve.

Those savings won't be reaped for at least a decade from now.

But it's the right direction to go in the long run






Back to top
CC
LSU Fan
Member since Feb 2004
13649 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


It'll save lots of money when the death panels are looking for folks to euthanize.





Back to top
Patrick_Bateman
USA Fan
Member since Jan 2012
8895 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


quote:

Those savings won't be reaped for at least a decade from now.

Pretty much like all of Obama's government "savings".






Back to top
tiger1014
LSU Fan
Member since Jan 2011
10359 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


Death panels really are needed. They don't exist and Obamacare doesn't create them, but we waste so much money on pointless prolonging of life measures it's not even funny.





Back to top
  Replies (0)
wickowick
LSU Fan
Head of Island
Member since Dec 2006
23424 posts
 Online 

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


quote:

It'll save lots of money when the death panels are looking for folks to euthanize.


Yep, bob search the records for anyone with XYZ, what will that save us if we cut off treatment?






Back to top
  Replies (0)
tiger1014
LSU Fan
Member since Jan 2011
10359 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


quote:

Pretty much like all of Obama's government "savings".


Except the electronic medical records really will be good in the long run, unlike the rest of Obama's medical mandates






Back to top
  Replies (0)
MSMHater
LSU Fan
Houston
Member since Oct 2008
11956 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


save money?

could have told you that was bull shite years ago. in fact, emr is generally a huge cost center when accounting for install, configuration, licensing, and maintenance. then you have to build interfaces to communicate with other facilities that have different programs. buy servers for all the data. just endless expenses.

and the $44000 per physician we are awarded for demonstrating meaningful use sure as hell won't cover those expenses.

But, imo, it does improve quality and continuity of care. it is good for the patients.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
MSMHater
LSU Fan
Houston
Member since Oct 2008
11956 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


quote:

labs are allowed to buy the electronic record system for doctor offices.


85% of all costs associated with emr. including upkeep and licensing.






Back to top
TigerinATL
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
Member since Feb 2005
33037 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


If they aren't saving money by going paperless they did it wrong.

But to me the real saving in going electronic is telemedicine. Vitals and symptoms will be taken and doctors will make remote diagnosises and over time we'll realize that a computer can just as easily give the diagnosis for 95% of the problems and before you know it everyone's cellphone becomes their doctor for basic illnesses.






Back to top
wiltznucs
South Florida Fan
Apollo Beach, FL
Member since Sep 2005
7723 posts
 Online 

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


Just finished implementing the single largest EMR purchase in the state of Florida at the time back in Sept 2011. Total cost was tens of millions.

We never made the investment for sake of potential savings and I think most vendors are not marketing the EMR systems as such. We have seen better patients results, shortened length of patient stay, improved revenue capture, reduced litigation and produced reams of data for quality analysis and program development.

On the flip side, there are major infection control issues associated with PC's located in patient rooms. The keyboards are like giant petri dishes from science class. There are ever growing expenses associated with the huge amounts of data produced. The value of a robust EMR cannot be quantified as a dollar figure, its much more involved than that...



This post was edited on 1/11 at 1:01 pm


Back to top
MSMHater
LSU Fan
Houston
Member since Oct 2008
11956 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


quote:

If they aren't saving money by going paperless they did it wrong.


Big deal, my records are paperless. Credentialing isn't, reappointments aren't, contracts aren't, patient education isn't, employees files aren't, consult logs, quality reporting, etc...

I still use a shite ton of paper, yet none of it from patient records. Not including the $44,000 subsidy, where would you suspect my cost savings to be just from EMR utilization.

I can see your point if you mean overall savings per pateint in the health system as a whole, but not for an individual practice (w/ sattelites) this early in the game.

quote:

But to me the real saving in going electronic is telemedicine. Vitals and symptoms will be taken and doctors will make remote diagnosises and over time we'll realize that a computer can just as easily give the diagnosis for 95% of the problems and before you know it everyone's cellphone becomes their doctor for basic illnesses.


That would be cool. Who carries the liability? Still the doctor? I think you'll have trouble getting them to accept liability on someone they never actually see.






Back to top
MSMHater
LSU Fan
Houston
Member since Oct 2008
11956 posts

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


quote:

We never made the investment for sake of potential savings and I think most vendors are not marketing the EMR systems as such. We have seen better patients results, shortened length of patient stay, improved revenue capture, reduced litigation and produced reams of data for quality analysis and program development.


+1


quote:

Just finished implementing the single largest EMR purchase


Which system?



This post was edited on 1/11 at 1:07 pm


Back to top
wiltznucs
South Florida Fan
Apollo Beach, FL
Member since Sep 2005
7723 posts
 Online 

re: Looks like electronic health records isn't saving healthcare money after all


Went with the full enterprise Epic EMR system to an 1,100 bed Medical Center, supporting several clinics and a few hundred Physicians.


This post was edited on 1/11 at 1:14 pm


Back to top


Back to top