Thanks for the responses. I have to admit that the results of the two studies seem to be in radical conflict. I strongly agree with the book analogy. I would add that sometimes the pages are in no sensible order, the print can be too small and the book can frustratingly be missing pages. Intuitively and experientially the EMR does have value. We have only begun to tap into its capability and we are embarrassingly struggling with implementing functionality that will add value. Clearly there has been too much emphasis on the non-clinical components which I would deem the low hanging fruit. Do we lack the programming skill or the implementation fortitude to attack the issues of CDS? I would love for those institutions that have been so successful (yes, I am jealous and proud of them) to weigh in. Logically, evidence-based standardized care has to be a step up from the free-for-all that we have now.
Thanks for the responses. I have to admit that the results of the two studies seem to be in radical conflict. I strongly agree with the book analogy. I would add that sometimes the pages are in no sensible order, the print can be too small and the book can frustratingly be missing pages.
Intuitively and experientially the EMR does have value. We have only begun to tap into its capability and we are embarrassingly struggling with implementing functionality that will add value. Clearly there has been too much emphasis on the non-clinical components which I would deem the low hanging fruit. Do we lack the programming skill or the implementation fortitude to attack the issues of CDS?
I would love for those institutions that have been so successful (yes, I am jealous and proud of them) to weigh in. Logically, evidence-based standardized care has to be a step up from the free-for-all that we have now.