3 ms·
You would think that's the case but from experience it's not. I can name two hospitals in NYC that were supposed to see savings from EHR implementations but en
by psaintla 11y ago
You would think that's the case but from experience it's not. I can name two hospitals in NYC that were supposed to see savings from EHR implementations but ended up having multiple competing EHRs that don't speak to each other because of conflicts of interest. You forget there in many cases there are many payors, tech vendors and providers within a single institution.
- wefarrell 11y agoThat's been my experience as well. EHR providers have no incentive to exchange data with each other and will do everything in their power not to. There are regional efforts towards interoperability but there needs to be more political will to mandate cooperation.
- dikaiosune 11y agoWhat about HL7? When I last worked with an EHR system (2? years ago), implementing HL7-based interop with other providers was all the rage so that they could eliminate fax machines when transferring patient records.
- psaintla 11y agoHL7 is a massive farce. It is an impossibly large standard that's difficult to understand and rarely used for interoperability.
- epmatsw 11y agoEh, Epic and Cerner interface fine, and offer HL7 interfaces, and Epic in particular bends over backwards to do what their customers want for implementations. My impression was that hospitals are (understandably) reluctant to allow their direct competitors direct access to information they've collected.
- psaintla 11y agoI wouldn't go that far with Epic. They always have some unadvertised module they try to push on hospitals the minute they want to interface with a third party.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]