TECH: A top 10 list from Quadramed

Health tech vendor Quadramed sent me this Top 10 list about Consumers and Health Information Technology

10. Health Information Technology Improves the Quality of Care Received

9. Health Information Technology is Critical in the Event of a Nation-Wide Emergency

8. Health Information Technology Increases Accountability from Providers

7. Health Information Technology Prevents Medical Errors and Saves Consumers’ Lives

6. Health Information Technology Can Empower Consumers to Make Smarter Healthcare Decisions

5. Health Information Technology Saves Consumers Money

4. Health Information Technology Allows Nurses to Spend More Time with Patients

3. Health Information Technology Increases the Health of the Entire American Population

2. Health Information Technology Keeps Hospitals Profitable

1. Health Information Technology Decreases Billing Errors

You may not agree with all of these! Fire at will!

Categories: Uncategorized

Tagged as:

4 replies »

  1. Your right, information tech is good for the health industry. In fact, its SO GOOD that the govt has the MORAL IMPERATIVE to strip the technology these companies are working on and have them distribute it at FREE COST to everyone.
    How can you greedy tech companies argue with that?

  2. > Health Information Technology…
    Implementing Health Information Technology might force management to think enough about their processes to achieve some of these salutary benefits, but they don’t come so much from the Health Information Technology as they do from the thought that goes into a good implementation. Too often, little thought goes into a new implementation, there is often resistance, insufficient resources are brought to bear on the implementation project, the implementation is often intended to automate rather than improve existing practice, sometimes people delude themselves into thinking they can do it quick `n dirty now and fix it “later”. And very often expectations are too high — these systems are not magic and may very well “dim the lights” when they’re first turned on. You’re usually replacing 5 – 10 years’ development all in one shot. Several weeks of pain is isn’t evidence of a disaster.

  3. All 10 may be true, but only if acquiring the health care technology does not bankrupt us first. All one has to do is read HIStalk for awhile to see that implementation is far from easy, cheap, user friendly, etc., etc….. That is in addition to my own previous experiences with IT disasters, one of which practically brought our hospital laboratory to a standstill for 2 weeks. Clearly there is much to be done in between marketing and reality.

  4. I agree with them all, but how much will it cost and where will the money come from to implement the technology?