NYTimes and the EMR

A recent NYTimes article [NYT August 20, 2006, "Smart Care via a Mouse, but What will it Cost"] is great chance to popularize the growing interest in Healthcare Information Technology, yet misses the mark. Mr Lohr touches on the core issue, but ends up downplaying the true value of the healthcare electronic medical record and rather attempt to narrow the discussion of computerized medical records.



I’d expect better from the NYTimes. The 'real story (as I read it) is that HIT/EMRs will have an effect on how drugs are sold and what type and by whom. Yes, it is true that this is a possible outcome, but what about writing something really useful like:


1. Ability to reduce underuse/overuse/misuse
2. Ability to use the ‘rules sets’ to reduce the incidence of drug/drug
interactions, allergic reactions, etc.
4. Mining information by physicians to better manage the population of patients seen with common conditions (diabetes, CHF, etc) and really study their practice outcomes,
5. Save lives (really!).


You get the drift.



Even the NYTimes needs to elevate the debate beyond the level of the highly paid pharmaceutical company lobbyist. We're waiting the depth of we expect in reporting from the other New York writers...a.k.a. The New Yorker.