6 ms·
The other commenter already said it: Liability. What if the scan is part of a procedure that ensures that the right drug is given to the right patient? Giving s
by sigmoid10 2y ago
The other commenter already said it: Liability. What if the scan is part of a procedure that ensures that the right drug is given to the right patient? Giving someone the wrong drug or even the wrong dose can cause serious harm. Imagine they kill someone that way and then during the investigation it turns out the they didn't scan the meds. It doesn't matter why they didn't scan it (lazy, forgetful, computer problem), it is en enormous legal risk for every party involved. Thousands of people die each year because of medical errors, so trying to prevent doctors from killing people by using strict procedures is very important. Even if it means that in extreme situations like this the procedure can cause harm as well. Overall it will save many, many more people than it will kill.
- throwaway3306a 2y agoWhat if it turns out they harmed the patient by insisting on following the standard procedure during a worldwide outage? Isn't that the same kind of liability risk, and is the regulation really going to protect them in this case? If so, isn't that a hugely problematic regulation?
- FeepingCreature 2y agoYes, and yes. Welcome to our messed up society.
- AlotOfReading 2y agoIn that case the nurse or doctor has a strong defense of "I was following policy" for their insurance and boss. The people writing hospital policies or regulations aren't thinking about individual patient outcomes unless some notable news story came out recently, and even then it's maybe the third or fourth priority on a list a hundred items long.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- sigmoid10 2y agoWe don't know that this is what actually happened in OP's case. I was referring to the comment you replied to and there it is pretty obvious that the regulation is exists to prevent harm from being done. But even if there is a clear justification, you would expose yourself to a lawsuit and need argue all this in court. I can totally understand why people don't want that, especially in the US. So if anything, you should blame the legal system.
- staticman2 2y agoI doubt refusing to treat patients when the computer is down insulates you from malpractice claims.
- freeAgent 2y agoIt probably also automates the chart entry and billing to insurance/patient, at least to an extent. I wouldn’t rest sole responsibility for this system on legal compliance or risk mitigation. Under normal circumstances, there’s also an efficiency improvement. The problem arises when there either is no workaround when the system doesn’t work, or workers aren’t trained well enough to know how to do things manually (or don’t have enough time under the less efficient mode of operating).