This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 7th, 2009 at 3:18 pm and is filed under FYI. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
To visit the Marshfield Clinic, a longtime innovator in health information technology, is to glimpse medicine's digital future.
A computerized patient record is a continuously updated document that includes the patient's health history, medications, lab tests, treatment guidelines and doctors' and nurses' notes. However, there is no crisp, conclusive cost-benefit arithmetic. Marshfield can point to various measurable savings, but has scant proof they outweigh the millions spent in the past and the $50 million-a-year technology budget. [link]
January 7th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Also see the post made just a few days ago on NYC's experimental program with EMRs.
January 7th, 2009 at 7:47 pm
Doesn’t save any money????? Don’t you realize this is how the Obama team expects to pay for health reform.
January 8th, 2009 at 11:16 am
Bret, there is going to be a painful transition from rhetoric to reality in the Obama adminisrtation.
January 8th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Hey, it’s not just Obama. Throw in Newt Gingrich, John McCain and a whole slew of similarly confused people on the right.
January 8th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
There is a reason for all this dewy-eyed enamor of EMRs. It sounds like you can cut health care costs without anyone giving anything up.
All gain. No pain.
February 20th, 2009 at 8:31 am
[...] as pointed out here, the real question is whether the investment in health IT is cost effective. As previously reported [...]