Archive

Posts Tagged ‘tech’

Security of electronic medical records

May 19th, 2009

scribbleUnless you’ve been hiding in a bubble over the last few years, you’ve probably heard of Electronic Medical Records (EMR), or Electronic Health Records (EHR). Some of you may even have experience working with these systems. Dozens of companies have invested millions into computerizing health records with the notion that digital information will remedy the healthcare system’s multitude of problems. These software frontends have evolved into impressively complex applications, ranging from Visual EMRs to BrainLab’s Digital Lightbox touchscreen interfaces.

One of the concerns with electronic data of any form is security. When the security of health information is involved, we cringe–there is an intangible queasiness to having your health records disseminated to the world. The feeling is worse than having your credit card information stolen. No matter the number of bits we throw into our encryption schemes, health policy pundits will always claim that our data can be hacked.

Well, how secure are paper records? If a file room goes up in flame, that’s the end of it. No backup. No recovery. What about theft? That simply involves old-fashioned robbery. No fancy hacking required. The irony is that paper records ARE secure, because of their inherent flaw that EMRs are designed to eliminate–penmanship.

Physicians have horrible penmanship. There are always exceptions, but the stereotype holds true in most cases. I recently spent 2 weeks at a primary care physician’s office. Making any sense of the chart records was simply impossible to an outsider. Lab results? If they’re not correctly placed under the “LABWORK” tab, good luck finding it. Progress notes? I barely advanced past the date. I was able to interpret a few of the cryptic scribble, like “RRR” (heart exam reveals regular rate and rhythm), but only because I am familiar with the jargon.

Take the image above. To a layperson, the scribble writes, “AFTER…”? To a medical professional, that looks like a medication dosing. Ceftriaxone? Ceftin? Ceftibuten? Who knows. To the skilled medical professional, we can work backwards to guess which medication we usually dose at “1 gram IV”.

Poor penmanship is the security system for paper records. Good luck reading any of the record. In fact, we might not even have a record for our VIPs. The data is all in our heads. Your health information is safe with your doctor. That is, until your doctor becomes senile.

computing, medicine , ,

Choosing a camera for the medical professional

May 13th, 2009

Lumix FX500Ophthalmologists love gadgets, and fortunately for us, there is no shortage of neat toys to collect. Topping my list of equipment to collect was a new digital camera–I had been carrying around a Canon A60, which was arguably Canon’s seventh-ever point-and-shoot digital camera. At six years old my Canon was simply the victim of Moore’s law, which states that computing power doubled approximately 18 months. Given that digital cameras are relatively inexpensive nowadays, I decided to replace my Canon.

What camera is suitable for the medical professional?

If I wanted a quality enthusiast camera, I’d have gone with a DSLR. For about $1000, you can have a hobbyist set, with maybe even two lenses. I don’t need that for everyday use. For the average medical professional (or resident), a point-and-shoot camera needs to meet these three criteria: 1) portability 2) functionality 3) price.

I wanted a point-and-shoot camera that I could easily carry around the hospital. One with manual controls would be nice, but is not necessary. This would be a camera that I could use to photograph clinical pathology in the hospital and to use for recreation. If you’re in the market for a new camera, read on. Read more…

computing , ,

Internet radio

May 5th, 2009

Dozens of online music streaming options have cropped up over the past few years, and many of them offer well-conceived interfaces. Pandora and Last.fm are two of my favorite players, and I will be reviewing them on this post. Please note: I hold no stake in either of these startups, although I would not mind if I am offered a stake…

Although I am relatively technically oriented, Pandora and Last.fm appeal to me through their intuitive interfaces. When I am in the hospital scrolling labs or churning out discharge summaries in the middle of the night, I do not wish to be burdened with menu options. I only want to fire up my portable firefox browser, start up some music, and get back to work.

Pandora.com requires you to create an account. It will save your channel preferences, and automatically load the next time you visit the site. The interface is clean; there is a volume and a “forward” control. The active song is displayed with album art a-la Coverflow.  The right column always displays a banner advertisement that can be [conveniently] removed with Adblock. If you want artist or album information, you can simply click on the links provided. The genre classification system works well to incorporate music of similar taste to that of your original search. Overall, it’s a great free online radio.

Last.fm offers identical content, although the interface is more distracting.  A description of the band and song is provided on every track, along with a colorful background consistent with last.fm’s color scheme. You do not have to create an account to use the website, which allows for easier access. I think that last.fm’s genre algorithm may be slightly more accurate than Pandora’s, although I may simply have a preference for Last.fm’s licensed artists. I typically use Last.fm at work mainly because I don’t have to log into their website.

A third web player that I frequent is Seeqpod. Unlikely Last.fm or Pandora, Seeqpod doesn’t offer a continuous player that tracks similar types of music you like. Instead, it finds the exact song that you search for, and queues it into the player. Furthermore, it links directly to a website that contains the media file so that you can download it! This is the only music search engine/player that I’ve encountered with download capabilities. However, the service appears to be under renovation at this point. Hopefully it will return in due time.

computing

Twitter for physicians

April 21st, 2009

twitterSince a portion of my web traffic originates from the medical community, I’ve decided to provide an update on a web technology that you’ve all probably heard about, Twitter. We see links to Twitter on websites, news links, and even television ads. Just what does this ubiquitous, cute bird do, and what role can he play in the medical field?

Those of you using Facebook are also probably wondering whether Twitter is any different from your Status. Well, the truth is, it’s not. To take a step back, Twitter serves as a one-way bulletin board. You can post whatever you want on it for the world to see, but others cannot write on your bulletin. Your viewer do not require an account on Twitter, nor do they ever have to log in. In contrast, your status page on Facebook can only be viewed by your designated friends.

The strength of Twitter lies in its accessibility. The owner can post links via SMS, website, email, desktop application, or portable application. It is concise, and viewable by the public with any of the aforementioned posting media. Your followers can receive automated updates on your bulletin. Therefore, it is an expedient means of communication.

I first saw the use of Twitter in medicine from Henry Ford Hospital, where they broadcasted updates directly from the OR. This was innovative, because it was a means for the public to become involved in the operating room. Imagine receving real-time updates on the carotid endarterectomy from OR #12:

“The shunt has been bridged!”

“EEG shows activity!”

“The resident calls for the yellow-tails!”

I would certainly try to incorporate the medium in my OR. Twitter’s application can also be extended beyond the OR. You can post updates from the clinic via Twitter.

“Dr. is running late today.”

“Two openings at 4:15pm today. Okay to walk in.”

The key is, of course, not to abuse posts to the extent that your patients become sick of getting updates. There is certainly a fine balance to be had. That’s it. Go to Twitter.com. Open an account. Play with it. In the meantime, you can follow my Twitter, also viewable on the side column. Real-time. Real news. Good stuff. If you have questions, contact me.

Update (4/23/09; 9:07pm): Mayo Clinic has even jumped onto the Twitter bandwagon, holding a webcast presentation on Twittering. Great stuff.

computing ,

Gmail add-ons

April 16th, 2009

I’ve been experimenting with some Google Labs Gmail options, and came across the mail goggles feature. When enabled, a simple Ajax menu with basic math appears whenever you attempt to send an email. You must answer five basic arithmetic problems correctly in order for the mail to send. It’s intended to prevent you from sending unintended emails that you’d regret afterward–likely ones that you send late-night or while inebriated.

Initially I was surprised that such an add-on even existed; how often do we send unintended emails? I don’t think I ever do. But hey, accidents do happen. I get emails every week from hospital administration notifying us of an upcoming conference, only to see them retracted (via Outlook). Surely misdirected emails could possibly only come from misdirected souls, right? How could an electronic sobriety meter ever save me from email embarassment?

In any case, I fired up the mail goggle feature last night, and enabled it for the hours from 10pm until 6am. Since I’m working night float this week, it was a great way to test out its efficacy. Early on, I had little problem sending mail. Around 3:45am, however, the problems surfaced. 343-88? 403-159? Damn subtraction. As I was fumbling to send an email I wrote to Joe about how much I hated my rotation, the 60 second timer expired, and I was presented with five new arithmetic operations. Damnit! As I cursed at myself for being stupid, I glanced at the header field and realized that I had erroneously addressed the email to Janine.

While I’m sure Janine, Jacob, or Jim would probably not have known that my email was intended for Joe anyway, Mail goggles had validated its existence. Mistakes happen to even the best of us, especially with sleep deprivation.  If there were only a similar invention that worked for vocalizing thoughts…

computing