Though I went electronic a few years ago, I finally figured out the key to e. It is simple: just go with the flow.
Most EMR or e-Rx modules have a certain "flow" of their own. The programs seem to force users to adopt to how they are written rather than to how the doctor herself might do things with pen and paper. Many of these electronic flows, or e-flows, seem to follow a different logic, a different algorithm, than we as doctors are used to, say, from being human or from having been practicing for many years prior to the software's development.
While many vendors try to engineer the software to be intuitive and analogous to a typical doctor's doctoring "process", the software really can't be everything to everyone. Most of us will have to change in order to use an EMR to its maximal efficiently. And that is a good thing. Just because an EMR forces a user to adapt, does not make it a bad product. In fact, if the change improves accuracy and completeneness of data collection, promotes mistake proof ordering and prescribing, and allows for efficient data review, then I am all for it. If adaptation promotes survival, it is a good thing.
E-prescribing for me has been difficult to adopt because writing a prescription on a traditional pad is quick and easy. Traditional prescribing works like this: I see patient-->discuss treatement options-->recommend medication-->discuss side-effects-->write prescrion-->hand it to patient. The whole process takes minutes. E-prescribing requires significantly up front more time and effort for me and I simply cannot do it while the patient sits in front of me in my office.
However, I have found that e-prescribing results in so much less aggravation on the back-end that it is really worth the time and effort to do it. I just had to change my methods to fit the new technology. Now that my metomorphosis is complete, I find that I am more efficient overall than I was before the change. I can see more patients, more easily, and with less aggravation. Things like, "Oh doctor, can you do 90 pills instead of 30" just don't happen to me any more. I have successfully found a method to e-prescribe that works for me and now I like it. Like my grandfather said when he got an answering machine as he turned 89, "Vichie, how did I ever live without one."
So if there are any managers out there frustrated because docs are resistnant to change, maybe try to convince them that once they adapt, they'll be amazed that they ever survived without the technology. Tell them that the key to e is C(hange).
Good luck.
Most EMR or e-Rx modules have a certain "flow" of their own. The programs seem to force users to adopt to how they are written rather than to how the doctor herself might do things with pen and paper. Many of these electronic flows, or e-flows, seem to follow a different logic, a different algorithm, than we as doctors are used to, say, from being human or from having been practicing for many years prior to the software's development.
While many vendors try to engineer the software to be intuitive and analogous to a typical doctor's doctoring "process", the software really can't be everything to everyone. Most of us will have to change in order to use an EMR to its maximal efficiently. And that is a good thing. Just because an EMR forces a user to adapt, does not make it a bad product. In fact, if the change improves accuracy and completeneness of data collection, promotes mistake proof ordering and prescribing, and allows for efficient data review, then I am all for it. If adaptation promotes survival, it is a good thing.
E-prescribing for me has been difficult to adopt because writing a prescription on a traditional pad is quick and easy. Traditional prescribing works like this: I see patient-->discuss treatement options-->recommend medication-->discuss side-effects-->write prescrion-->hand it to patient. The whole process takes minutes. E-prescribing requires significantly up front more time and effort for me and I simply cannot do it while the patient sits in front of me in my office.
However, I have found that e-prescribing results in so much less aggravation on the back-end that it is really worth the time and effort to do it. I just had to change my methods to fit the new technology. Now that my metomorphosis is complete, I find that I am more efficient overall than I was before the change. I can see more patients, more easily, and with less aggravation. Things like, "Oh doctor, can you do 90 pills instead of 30" just don't happen to me any more. I have successfully found a method to e-prescribe that works for me and now I like it. Like my grandfather said when he got an answering machine as he turned 89, "Vichie, how did I ever live without one."
So if there are any managers out there frustrated because docs are resistnant to change, maybe try to convince them that once they adapt, they'll be amazed that they ever survived without the technology. Tell them that the key to e is C(hange).
Good luck.
