3 ms·
When the purpose of the software is to support the existing practice, if the users don't see the benefit then the software has failed. If this is the end resul
by andrewaylett 3y ago
When the purpose of the software is to support the existing practice, if the users don't see the benefit then the software has failed. If this is the end result of going digital, the correct solution is to not go digital.
Skeuomorphism may or may not be the right answer -- I suspect not, but anything's possible. What the doctor appears to miss, though, is the time-based context of a document. It might be significantly easier to find a single record (especially if you don't know when something was recorded) but whoever specified the software missed the utility of a time-based context.
Or possibly failed to train the doctor on how to do with the software what they were used to doing with a physical file, but that would still count as a failure of the digitisation effort.
- slowmovintarget 3y agoMost doctors practice in clinics where software is mandated by the administration, which in turn has pressures from insurance companies that the software was likely chosen to satisfy. Put more simply: Doctors these days likely cannot choose to avoid going digital.
- andrewaylett 3y agoThere's a key point missing from most of the discussion: "In the USA". Also, whether or not it's the choice of the doctors is only tangentially relevant to whether or not it's a failure of the system. Even if money is the only consideration, I'd question whether the system as described is the most effective. Ultimately, a US-based medical administration bills on being able to show that they've done things that they can justify having done. Hobbling the doctors' capacity to actually carry out work impedes that process, regardless of any questions around medical effectiveness. And of course, "going digital" doesn't strictly imply moving to a broken system either.