<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Electronic Health Records, Redux</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.robhyndman.com/2005/04/29/electronic-health-records-redux/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.robhyndman.com/2005/04/29/electronic-health-records-redux/</link>
	<description>any technology distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2012 14:32:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamie L.</title>
		<link>http://www.robhyndman.com/2005/04/29/electronic-health-records-redux/comment-page-1/#comment-57025</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamie L.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2007 21:02:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.robhyndman.com/2005/04/29/electronic-health-records-redux/#comment-57025</guid>
		<description>Accessibility from different providers is definitely the most pressing requirement for EHR (and also the least fulfilled.) One thing that concerns me from a privacy perspective, though, is it seems that a lot of the pioneers in this area are doing it hand in hand with large employers instead of working exclusively with patients and providers (e.g. WebMD&#039;s partnership with WalMart).  One exception that I know of is a company called Chart Biopsy, (www.chartbiopsy.com) they have an EMR system that&#039;s designed specifically to allow different offices to communicate.  It was originally designed primarily for local free clinics that end up sharing a lot of patients.  (I know about them both through volunteer work at these clinics and they asked me for feedback occasionally on the interface, however I don&#039;t work for them.)  Anyhow, recently they&#039;ve announced they&#039;re going to start offering office accounts to regular medical practices.

Personally, I think a better solution than chart biospy&#039;s approach is to better standardize EHR exchange so that a multiplicity of EHR systems can coexist peacefully, with perhaps a government sponsored repository for records.  If it gets left to the private sector, though, I&#039;m much more comfortable with Chart Biopsy&#039;s approach than WebMD&#039;s.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Accessibility from different providers is definitely the most pressing requirement for EHR (and also the least fulfilled.) One thing that concerns me from a privacy perspective, though, is it seems that a lot of the pioneers in this area are doing it hand in hand with large employers instead of working exclusively with patients and providers (e.g. WebMD&#8217;s partnership with WalMart).  One exception that I know of is a company called Chart Biopsy, (www.chartbiopsy.com) they have an EMR system that&#8217;s designed specifically to allow different offices to communicate.  It was originally designed primarily for local free clinics that end up sharing a lot of patients.  (I know about them both through volunteer work at these clinics and they asked me for feedback occasionally on the interface, however I don&#8217;t work for them.)  Anyhow, recently they&#8217;ve announced they&#8217;re going to start offering office accounts to regular medical practices.</p>
<p>Personally, I think a better solution than chart biospy&#8217;s approach is to better standardize EHR exchange so that a multiplicity of EHR systems can coexist peacefully, with perhaps a government sponsored repository for records.  If it gets left to the private sector, though, I&#8217;m much more comfortable with Chart Biopsy&#8217;s approach than WebMD&#8217;s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

