http://www.histalkpractice.com/2009/03/25/news-32609/ Physician practice and systems news and opinion Thu, 02 Sep 2010 14:43:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://www.histalkpractice.com/2009/03/25/news-32609/comment-page-1/#comment-163 danfield Thu, 26 Mar 2009 05:22:21 +0000 http://www.histalkpractice.com/?p=397#comment-163 I am an eager adopter of new technology. That said, anything on an iphone (or blackberry or whatever) that has to do with patients is generally too small to be efficient. Maybe if I were an intensivist following a patients parameters or an internist receiving nontrivial alerts, the handheld device would be slightly helpful but even prescribing on these small tools is painful and slow. I am trying a netbook next. I can access Epic and still have a convenient form factor. I am an eager adopter of new technology. That said, anything on an iphone (or blackberry or whatever) that has to do with patients is generally too small to be efficient. Maybe if I were an intensivist following a patients parameters or an internist receiving nontrivial alerts, the handheld device would be slightly helpful but even prescribing on these small tools is painful and slow. I am trying a netbook next. I can access Epic and still have a convenient form factor.

]]> http://www.histalkpractice.com/2009/03/25/news-32609/comment-page-1/#comment-160 SS Thu, 26 Mar 2009 01:54:20 +0000 http://www.histalkpractice.com/?p=397#comment-160 Regarding the Koppel article on vendor's skirting liability, the Obama administration has promised an atmosphere of national accountability and responsibility. Why, then, has it simultaneously employed the coercive force of government (payment penalties for HIT non adopters after the absurdly short period of five years from now, 2014) to push an exploratory medical device from an unaccountable industry of unproven ROI at a cost of tens of billions of dollars on to the medical profession? Regarding the Koppel article on vendor’s skirting liability, the Obama administration has promised an atmosphere of national accountability and responsibility. Why, then, has it simultaneously employed the coercive force of government (payment penalties for HIT non adopters after the absurdly short period of five years from now, 2014) to push an exploratory medical device from an unaccountable industry of unproven ROI at a cost of tens of billions of dollars on to the medical profession?

]]>