Skip to content


 

While the issue of Electronic Medical Records and physicians seems a little off base for an EMS blog, the reality is that their use and adoption is occuring throughout all levels of healthcare.   This includes the prehospital arena and intrafacility transport systems.  Insurance information capture is now stressed with most ambulance systems, both public and private.  The concerns and thoughts expressed by the below reposted blog by Dr Palestrant, therefore, I believe address the 911 community as well.

An added concern that I have as an Emergency Medicine physician is that most of the prehospital documentation systems don't integrate with the EMRs established in the Emergency Departments.   By and large, the EMRs which have been adopted reflect administrative decisions without consideration of the care provider's/Emergency Department's needs.  Specifically, it is absolutely obsured that charts produced via a 911 squad don't automatically populate and integrate with any giving receiving hospital's Emergency Department record.   Often hours to days pass without a hardcopy arriving (if ever provided).   What good does this do for the patient? Intrafacility transport services are forced to waste time extracting needed information from a hospitals system and hand keying it into their charts, mostly extracting demographics for billing purposes, while a patient awaits an airlift to a nearby cath lab or stroke center.   Where is the conductor who is orchestrating this adoption of Electronic Records?

The lack of harmony and consistency with EMRs, both facility based and prehospital is addressed in Dr Palestrant's post.  

The direct link to his post is here: http://par8o.com/wordpress/why-emr-is-a-four-letter-word-to-most-doctors/

The full and text follows below:

Don’t get me wrong, EMRs (Electronic Medical Records) are inevitable. Over the long-run they are almost certainly good for physicians, patients and the healthcare industry.

However, their origin and the ulterior motives currently driving their adoption is sowing the seeds of their failure.  First, what is ACTUALLY happening out there?  The most recent CDC data would seem to be encouraging for EMR adoption (http://1.usa.gov/vu8wiy), with EMR use (finally) passing 50%.

Too bad there is more to the story.

If you look at adoption rates for so called “fully functional EMRs” (http://bit.ly/uUQ3FV), the adoption rate remains in the low teens (full data for 2011 is not yet available).  So why is there an almost 4-fold discrepancy between “any EMR” and “fully functional EMR”?  If EMRs are so great, why does the government have to essentially “bribe” physicians to adopt them through incentives such as the meaningful use incentive program (http://go.cms.gov/97BFXJ)?  Why is this so important to them that they didn’t even wait for the healthcare affordability act to implement this “incentive”? (They put it in the stimulus package after Obama had only been in office a few months.)

The 50% adoption rates seen in the first link reflect the presence of ANY type of an EMR-like technology. While it is a great headline for sure, the second link shows that this is an overly broad declaration.  When we look at “fully functional systems,” meaning they are being used for a full work-flow solution, we get numbers in the low teens instead. (When you subtract out unique situations such as Kaiser, the VA, and a few large independent doctor networks, I suspect the actual number is much lower.)

One reason that incentives and threats of decreased payment are necessary for EMR adoption is that the industry and physicians have known for years that EMRs do not improve productivity and that it is highly questionable that EMRs lead to better patient outcomes.  So why is all this taxpayer debt being accrued by throwing borrowed money at the healthcare industry to drive EMR adoption, if the end users are so disenchanted?  As Jonathan Bush, the Founder-CEO of AthenaHealth (a major EMR supplier) famously said, “It’s healthcare information technology’s version of cash-for-clunkers”(http://bit.ly/9ZgUa7), and,

Because it is actually all about control.

The goal of EMRs is to wrestle control of healthcare away from the doctor-patient relationship into the hands of third parties who can then implement their policies….by simply removing a button or an option in the EMR.  If you can’t select a particular treatment option, for all intents and purposes the option doesn’t exist or the red tape to choose it is so painful that there is little incentive to “fight the system.”

For patients, this means that they will only be able to consume the healthcare that they “qualify” for or be forced to find another way to obtain the care that they want and need.  It is the second outcome, see previous post (Benjamin Franklin, Lightning & Ex-Communication) that is the most intriguing, because as “shoppers,” patients will want to be informed and have choices as they take on more responsibility for the cost and quality of their own care.  This approach works very well with Health Savings Accounts, which were conveniently deemphasized in the healthcare reform effort.  Like the lightning going to ground, this is the inevitable future for healthcare in this country (assuming the other alternative, an acceleration to a single payor system does not occur first).

For physicians…well, it isn’t hard to figure out where this is all heading.  EMRs are quickly becoming the instrument by which we are controlled and managed.  As an example, many organizations are already starting to restrict diagnostic testing and therapies via EMR.

What’s next? Patient referrals?  It will be the final step in subjugating physicians.

So why is genuine EMR adoption struggling so much?  After all, one may argue that the accessibility of instant data that technology now enables is the greatest single advance in patient care so far this century.  With so much money being thrown at the problem, one might expect a much greater adoption. Why hasn’t it played out in a much more positive way?

This comes back to the origin and ulterior motives of EMRs.  First, EMRs have been largely a top down effort.  Rather than working with physicians to design the technologies and drive adoption, the experience (and almost universally the perception) is that the technology has been thrust upon physicians by administrators.  Compounding this is the unintended consequences of the meaningful use government incentives (or cash-for-clunkers program to use Jonathan Bush’s, more colorful language).  Having left the guidelines vague and largely written by a small group of industry insiders, most products have become a Tower of Babel with atrocious user interfaces and user experiences that….well, I don’t blame my fellow physicians for not wanting to use them. In addition to being expensive, they are complex, inefficient, and do not make physicians or their staff more productive.

Widespread adoption of an EMR (or multiple compatible EMRs) that is intuitive and easy to use, that empowers the end user and patients, and that actually helps to make the healthcare system more efficient would be a good thing for doctors, patients, and the industry.  However, unless we recognize what the ultimate goals are and better involve the people most critical to their effective use (physicians), I believe Jonathan’s prediction will be true and cash-for-clunkers applied to the healthcare sector will turn out about as successful as that other government program…TARP.

 

Adam Sharp, MD
Founder par8o & SERMO

Posted in Emergency Communications, ems-health-safety, ems-topics, health care reform, healthcare reform, technology-communications, technology-communications-ems-topics, Uncategorized

Health Care Reform Hits Mainstreet

I had the wonderful pleasure this Wednesday and Thursday to attend the Neuroscience Conference hosted by Capital Health Center at the Borgata, in Atlantic City, New Jersey.    One of the speakers was Mr. David Knowlton.  Mr Knowlton is the President and CEO of the New Jersey Health Care Quality Institute. He is a fantastic speaker who is driven to improve health care delivery for the state of New Jersey.

A major element of his talk had to do with the recently passed Health Care Reform Bill. It we be affecting all of us over the next couple of years.  He showed a video, whose link is provided below, which explains this bill.   While not an expected topic for publication in a blog centering around EMS, I urge you to watch. 

As always, comments and discussion appreciated!

 

Click the highlighted link below!

Health Reform Hits Main Street

Posted in health care reform, healthcare reform, Uncategorized

EMS System in NJ

With permission – the following is an email from a paramedic with whom I have a great deal of respect for.   He and I have had conversations regarding the state of EMS in New Jersey.   Fear of reprisals from his employer is the reason his identity having been removed from this email.   This Paramedic has also discussed the number of other New Jersey paramedics with similar frustrations.  We have also discussed the issue of this individual coming on-board under an alias and using this blog as a conduit and public forum to help institute change to a very broken system.

This paramedic’s email follows:

Hey Jordan,

I thoroughly enjoyed reading your blog.  I can certainly understand your frustrations with the system since you are a direct recipient of the final product as the squads roll into the ED each and every day.  I myself am appalled by the way things are run, particularly in clinical oversight, education length and quality, as well as policies and procedures. Unfortuneatly, there is nothing, you, I, nor anyone at the Department of Health level can actually change, due to the restrictive legislature that gives us the authority to operate is antiquated and limiting in it’s wording, rather than being enabling and progressive.

What really blows my mind is that the system we currently operate in does not mandate any minimum standards for providers (mainly BLS, as ALS is in my opinion OVER regulated), does not require an ambulance to be licensed by the Department of Health nor meet any minimum standards, nor mandate minimum response times.  Better yet, EMS in New Jersey isn’t even considered an essential service like police, fire, and municipal services are.  It’s simply, sickening.

Like I told you, there is a bill that we are trying to pass which will overhaul the EMS system in NJ, and change A LOT of things.  This is in response from a outside consulting company that spent quite some time in the state, auditing the way our EMS system is running, and what we can do to improve it.  I have included a copy of the report as well as a copy of the bill, which is a response to the system report in this e-mail.  In a nutshell, the report stated that the NJ EMS system in a “state of near collapse.”

The main opponent to this overhaul bill is the New Jersey State First Aid Council, which we so affectionately call “The First Grade Council.”  I am thoroughly convinced that they are the sole reason EMS in NJ is so backwards and antiquated.  If they are allowed to maintain any type political or lobbying power, there is no way we can progress into the 20th century here, let alone the 21st century.  They oppose a two EMT minimum standard, increasing the amount of time an EMT class takes to complete (we’re trying to comply with the new National Scope of Practice with this bill), allowing the Dept. of Health full authority over the operation of an ambulance, as well as many other things.  Too many to list actually. However, if this passes, the Council will basically be rendered powerless, and we can finally move on, without them.

Here is a link to the TriData report that was done on the EMS system a few years back. Verrrry interesting.

http://www.state.nj.us/health/ems/documents/ems_study_report.pdf

Here is a link to the bill they want to pass.  They’re hoping to put it in front of the governor by the end of the month. But don’t hold your breath.

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2010/Bills/A2500/2095_I1.PDF

Here is a link to the website that all the stakeholders in the new bill setup in support of the bill.

On the “The Issue” page, there is a short commentated video that explains what the bill is going to accomplish.

http://www.supportnjems.com/

I hope this gives you some interesting reading.  Talk to you soon!

->Signature and Name withheld.

Posted in 911, ems-health-safety, ems-topics, healthcare reform, patient-management, training-fire-rescue-topics, Uncategorized

The Free Taxi Ride

Years ago I was working with New York City as an EMT out of Queens General Hospital.  I remember being in shock after picking up an otherwise non-ill appearing man who gave a complaint that I currently cannot recall.  We took him in a city ambulance to the local hospital.  The part that shocked me was that he never entered the hospital.  He thanked us and proceeded to go across the street to do his shopping. He never was sick and never intended to enter the ED doors.   We served as free transportation for him.   He expressed no qualms regarding his actions.  The only conclusion I can draw today was that, in his eyes, it cost him nothing.   He was able to get away with it.   He had a complete disconnect not only from the ethical issues of what he did, but the costs being eaten by the city government for the taxi ride.

The same issues apply daily in the care I provide in the Emergency Department.   There are multiples of patients who use the ED as primary care who are donning the latest Iphones, wearing expensive leather jackets, downed in expensive Aeropostel and Uggs clothing.  They are at a lost when I ask them who provides their primary care.  “I just go to the hospital!” Attempts to explain to these people the importance of routine primary care by an appropriately trained individual falls on deaf ears.  They will openly admit that the use of clinics and primary care facilities will cost them money.  They have nothing in the game.  Hence, using one of the most expensive forms of medical care, which often isn’t the best care, continues to be used and abused.

I recently questioned an administrator regarding the potential logic of opening up various clinics.   Perhaps a pediatric clinic on Tuesdays staffed with board certified pediatricians, Wednesday an adult primary care clinic staffed by Internists, and so on.  It seemed like a perfect solution to me to guarantee good follow up with individuals most appropriately trained to assure convalescence and preventive care.  “We looked into this, and financially it isn’t viable.”  In other words, my translation of this statement is that the hospitals can collect more state money for emergent care for non emergent patients than they would receive if they set up and established local clinic care.  Follow the dollar signs.   The current government bureaucracy continues to do a disservice to the very individuals they are supposed to protect.

Emergency care being a safety net and providing primary care is something that will never end.  However, I wonder how much general abuse would stop if the general public had to send in their taxes monthly rather than not realize that they are disappearing from their paychecks until April 15th.  In other words, each month a payment would have to be sent in no differently than a payment to a cell phone carrier.  The statement of “let the government do it” would be reconnected to the concept that the government is us.  Abuse local services? – Your taxes go up.   Your monthly payment to the local government-taxing agent goes up.   Don’t pay?  Sorry – your garbage will no longer be collected.  Don’t pay?  Sorry, your mail service stops.

Will this ever happen.  Of course not.  Still, free taxi rides are destroying the system.

Posted in 911, ems-health-safety, ems-topics, healthcare reform, patient-management

Tagged , , , , , , ,

The Perception of Care Versus Quality of Care

Recently, I received a letter “Thanking me” for servicing my car at a local dealership. Scripted words stated how they were looking forward to my having a “fantastic” ownership experience indicates that I will be receiving a survey in the mail. It is obvious that the dealership, based on guidance from the outside survey firm, hopes that these key phrases will become embedded in my mind as I fill out their forthcoming mailing. I believe that I am like most people and throw most of these surveys away. The real motivators for my paying attention to these flyers and letters is either boredom, frustration or, rarely, anger. The later usually generates from me a letter and a phone call.

The reason for bringing up this topic of surveying and scripting has to do with how their use has permeated hospital care. The staffs in most ERs are now taught to use scripting during all patient encounters to help boost scores on subsequent third party surveys. The phrases sound artificial and forced to my ear. I was raised by my parents with the adage that “actions speak louder than words”. Hence, with the amount of effort my colleagues, staff and I display in our patient care, have to state these phrases (referred to in the lexicon of these companies as “key drivers”) seems very disingenuous. I use them as has been requested of me. However, this is not my prime concern with the current means of surveying acute hospital care. Being polite and courteous is something that everyone should expect. I try to be such in all my endeavors, including my work as an Emergency Medicine physician. In this regard, I absolutely agree with these surveys. There are a variety of issues which I see developing from the over reliance and misapplication of the survey data

Roses and gift baskets often stream past me in the ER to the nursing station in the ICU. In a recent case, a 45-year-old father of three that we sedated and intubated on arrival in fulminant cardiac failure remembers nothing of his ordeal in the Emergency Department. Near death, my colleagues and I performed as we were trained and delivered excellent care. This patient woke up in the intensive care unit. No survey for the care we provided in the ER will be generated for this individual. Any collected data will reflect strictly the care provided in the Intensive Care Unit. Interestingly, this is precisely the type of patient that is central in the curriculum in Emergency Medicine residencies. In other words, the Emergency Department is ignored in surveys for providing the type of care the physician staff is most qualified to provide.

Recently, a physician assistant confided in me that her department head at another emergency department chastised her. She explained how she was trying to explain to a young, otherwise healthy patient with a viral illness that antibiotics are thoroughly ineffective for her and can actually be harmful. Apparently, a negative survey or phone call was the product of her trying to practice good medicine. She was told that in the future she was to provide these medications whether indicated or not because that is what the “customer wants”. The “hospital is running a business”. Her experience is not a unique vignette. This type of patient represents the focus of many of these surveys. Urgent and nonemergent patients, often with an expectation of rapid “one stop McDonald’s shopping” for care and an expectation of an immediate “cure”, often receive these surveys in the mail. Combine the acquiescing to patient demands for unnecessary tests and medications despite it being poor medicine, with the push to rapidly see and discharge low acuity patients, inappropriate and substandard care is often being provided. Unnecessary and repeat studies involving ionizing radiation, especially to children, often occur.

Television shows have given the public the belief that Emergency Departments have specialists just waiting to come out of the back room to solve any problem at a moment’s notice. Not only is that not true, but also patients have no idea what Emergency Physicians are trained to do or their fund of knowledge. It is not a uncommon experience for a patient with a chronic, nonacute illness to show up in my emergency department which has confounded their specialist. Obviously, my two weeks of residency training, for instance, in dermatology, is not going to swiftly provide an answer for such a patient. After potentially multiple hours waiting to be seen, these patients are often unhappy being informed that I will not be able to answer their concerns.

To push up satisfaction scores, narcotics are being administered and prescribed with increasing frequency regardless of the true nature of the injury or complaint. I have witnessed my colleagues prescribe Percocet and other narcotics often without checking to see how many times in the last six months an individual showed up with the very same toothache. Addiction is a large enough issue already. As mentioned before, the push to move patients through rapidly and to drive up survey scores is only adding to this problem.

Another failure of the current hospital survey system has to do with morbidity and mortality reports published in various magazines and newspapers. To the layperson, one surgeon may inappropriately be seen as a “butcher” or a hospital may seem “like a death trap”. Not taken into account is how many of the more aggressive, higher quality surgeons will take on more difficult case with, as a result, higher morbidity and mortality scores. Usually, these highly skilled individuals are located at teaching and university hospital settings. Often, they do not have a choice to accept these transfers from community hospitals. These surgeons and institutions end up being penalized in the public’s eye in published websites and print media. Their community based potentially less skilled counterparts appear better in the public eye in these publications.

An entire industry has been erected to measure the public’s perception of services offered by various forms of business. Unfortunately, the survey industry’s product doesn’t translate well for specific niches in healthcare. Emergency services selects for a unique “customer” base. This customer base is comprised of the truly ill and the desperate, those who have no where else to turn for care, as well as those with poor coping skills and a naiveté regarding emergency care realities and, on occasion, those with secondary gain interests. What is being measured is the perception of quality in care and not quality of care. The survey industry has duped the hospital administrators who are trying to promote their “businesses”. Kind, considerate, thoughtful care, with a focus on the patient is absolutely paramount. Inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics and addictive narcotics, exposure to potentially harmful unnecessary studies, especially in developing children, as well as further straining an already economically burdened health care system are just some of the products of blinding following these surveys. The survey industry has duped hospital administration into believing that the same system used to evaluate customer service at my auto dealership translates to all niches of hospital care. Obviously, it doesn’t. Blind focusing on these surveys without true reflection on their source and meaning will lead to many patients becoming victims.

Posted in ems-topics, healthcare reform, patient-management

Tagged , , ,