Reposting for Eyeforhealthcare Delegates
This is a re-post of three entries about the increased mortality reported in “Pediatrics” after the implementation of a Computerised Physician Order Entry System (CPOE) for the convenience of delegates at the “Successful Implementation of NPfIT 2006” in London. These entries relate to discussions during the sessions I chaired on 30 January 2006.
First entry on the Pediatrics article.
Third entry and link to post-publication peer review.
Links to other relevant blogs and websites are in the postings.
Comments
Thanks Colin for the good discussion at the meeting.
The safety or otherwise of what is being built for the NHS is not a given, and we must be vigilant. I had a very interesting discussion with a Scottish delegate, hot from the Court in Aberdeen, where decision support software, and the responsibilities of all parties - software vendor, guardian of the data, healthcare practitioner - were under scrutiny.
If the foggy CfH/NPfIT vision really delivers, we are in new and exciting territory, and the debate 'across the pond' is vital to clarifying just who is responsible.
I had an interesting discussion on Telemedicine in Canada a few years ago, and the easy answer is that everyone is potentially in the dock when it goes wrong.
Just as we will be taken for granted when it all goes fine.
Posted by: Andy Hadley | January 31, 2006 08:33 PM
I think that we must have this debate in the NHS. Adding IT to the healthcare-delivery mix risks worsening care unless we plan, prepare, transform and monitor.
As I have said in another posting, healthcare IT will not fix "broken" healthcare processes. Some might consider a ten percent mismatch (NPSA: "Right Patient, Right Care") between required and delivered care as a symptom of broken processes.
If that is so, what is the NHS going to do about it?
Posted by: Colin Jervis, Kinetic Consulting | February 1, 2006 07:02 PM