William PevsnerSep 8. 2017 11:23pmWilliam Pevsner20170908/article/20160625/magazine/306259982
I agree with S. Silverstein. Lawyers love to claim it's "negligent use" is in fact when was said below...and vendors will and are becoming more a part of the formula...so in that sense Mr. Fuller is correct since they also have pockets with cash to be mined
Well, no, Mr. Fuller. If you happened to be aware of the reports now proliferating from the most reputable medical organizations, e.g., ECRI, JC, IOM, NIST and others, you'd be aware that negligent design and negligent implementation are far more a cause of use error then the user error you describe.
And there's the rub...LIfe for doctors has NOT been an App! We have systems desperate to get a piece of the healthcare dollars being thrown at the technology, but they have only created systems THAT FUNCTION BUT DON'T WORK...
We missed a golden opportunity at physicians though some are now transitioning to the quagmire since we have physicians are desperate for something that actually does what it was suppose to do...gives us more time to be with our patients, not our noses in our computers trying "document to the highest level of specificity so we can get the reimbursement we have had just for doing the job we have always been doing.
The false optimism of Dr Wachter will be clearly seen once we do what we could have had in the first place when we started EHR's; one system with TRUE END USER INTEROPERABILITY. WHat we have now is the Gran Trunk of India and we should have the Autobahn and a true information hwy!
S SilversteinJun 25. 2016 2:24pmS Silverstein20160625/article/20160625/MAGAZINE/306259982
re: âIt looks like it's a round of litigation that's about to happen as the inevitable human errors in dispensing healthcare are now being traced back to negligent use of the computer technology,â said Robert Fuller, a partner at Nelson Hardiman and former chief operating officer at Downey (Calif.) Regional Medical Center.
Well, no, Mr. Fuller. If you happened to be aware of the reports now proliferating from the most reputable medical organizations, e.g., ECRI, JC, IOM, NIST and others, you'd be aware that negligent design and negligent implementation are far more a cause of use error then the user error you describe.
âUse errorâ is a term used very specifically to refer to user interface designs that will engender users to make errors of commission or omission. It is true that users do make errors, but many errors are due not to user error per se but due to designs that are flawed, e.g., poorly written messaging [or lack of messaging, e.g., no warnings of potentially dangerous actions], misuse of color-coding conventions, omission of information, etc.
Blaming the user is part of the problem that perpetuates bad health IT.
See the definition of bad health IT at http://www.cci.drexel.edu/faculty/ssilverstein/cases/
S SilversteinJun 25. 2016 2:23pmS Silverstein20160625/article/20160625/MAGAZINE/306259982
re: âIt looks like it's a round of litigation that's about to happen as the inevitable human errors in dispensing healthcare are now being traced back to negligent use of the computer technology,â said Robert Fuller, a partner at Nelson Hardiman and former chief operating officer at Downey (Calif.) Regional Medical Center.
Well, no, Mr. Fuller. If you happened to be aware of the reports now proliferating from the most reputable medical organizations, e.g., ECRI, JC, IOM, NIST and others, you'd be aware that negligent design and negligent implementation are far more a cause of use error then the user error you describe.
âUse errorâ is a term used very specifically to refer to user interface designs that will engender users to make errors of commission or omission. It is true that users do make errors, but many errors are due not to user error per se but due to designs that are flawed, e.g., poorly written messaging [or lack of messaging, e.g., no warnings of potentially dangerous actions], misuse of color-coding conventions, omission of information, etc.
Blaming the user is part of the problem that perpetuates bad health IT.
See the definition of bad health IT at http://www.cci.drexel.edu/faculty/ssilverstein/cases/
4 Readers' Comments
I agree with S. Silverstein. Lawyers love to claim it's "negligent use" is in fact when was said below...and vendors will and are becoming more a part of the formula...so in that sense Mr. Fuller is correct since they also have pockets with cash to be mined
Well, no, Mr. Fuller. If you happened to be aware of the reports now proliferating from the most reputable medical organizations, e.g., ECRI, JC, IOM, NIST and others, you'd be aware that negligent design and negligent implementation are far more a cause of use error then the user error you describe.
And there's the rub...LIfe for doctors has NOT been an App! We have systems desperate to get a piece of the healthcare dollars being thrown at the technology, but they have only created systems THAT FUNCTION BUT DON'T WORK...
We missed a golden opportunity at physicians though some are now transitioning to the quagmire since we have physicians are desperate for something that actually does what it was suppose to do...gives us more time to be with our patients, not our noses in our computers trying "document to the highest level of specificity so we can get the reimbursement we have had just for doing the job we have always been doing.
The false optimism of Dr Wachter will be clearly seen once we do what we could have had in the first place when we started EHR's; one system with TRUE END USER INTEROPERABILITY. WHat we have now is the Gran Trunk of India and we should have the Autobahn and a true information hwy!
I would be happy to see lawsuits against the EMR vendors. They've certainly been completely deaf to our complaints about usability.
re: âIt looks like it's a round of litigation that's about to happen as the inevitable human errors in dispensing healthcare are now being traced back to negligent use of the computer technology,â said Robert Fuller, a partner at Nelson Hardiman and former chief operating officer at Downey (Calif.) Regional Medical Center.
Well, no, Mr. Fuller. If you happened to be aware of the reports now proliferating from the most reputable medical organizations, e.g., ECRI, JC, IOM, NIST and others, you'd be aware that negligent design and negligent implementation are far more a cause of use error then the user error you describe.
âUse errorâ is a term used very specifically to refer to user interface designs that will engender users to make errors of commission or omission. It is true that users do make errors, but many errors are due not to user error per se but due to designs that are flawed, e.g., poorly written messaging [or lack of messaging, e.g., no warnings of potentially dangerous actions], misuse of color-coding conventions, omission of information, etc.
Blaming the user is part of the problem that perpetuates bad health IT.
See the definition of bad health IT at http://www.cci.drexel.edu/faculty/ssilverstein/cases/
It's a tired old refrain, I'm sorry to say.
re: âIt looks like it's a round of litigation that's about to happen as the inevitable human errors in dispensing healthcare are now being traced back to negligent use of the computer technology,â said Robert Fuller, a partner at Nelson Hardiman and former chief operating officer at Downey (Calif.) Regional Medical Center.
Well, no, Mr. Fuller. If you happened to be aware of the reports now proliferating from the most reputable medical organizations, e.g., ECRI, JC, IOM, NIST and others, you'd be aware that negligent design and negligent implementation are far more a cause of use error then the user error you describe.
âUse errorâ is a term used very specifically to refer to user interface designs that will engender users to make errors of commission or omission. It is true that users do make errors, but many errors are due not to user error per se but due to designs that are flawed, e.g., poorly written messaging [or lack of messaging, e.g., no warnings of potentially dangerous actions], misuse of color-coding conventions, omission of information, etc.
Blaming the user is part of the problem that perpetuates bad health IT.
See the definition of bad health IT at http://www.cci.drexel.edu/faculty/ssilverstein/cases/
It's a tired old refrain, I'm sorry to say.