EDR consultants’ sudden openness about the downsides of electronic dental records indicates to me that giddy unaccountability in the EDR industry is over. If you have been following the news reports I’ve shared on the internet, I think you will agree: With so much news this year about unstoppable cybercrime, stolen laptops and Department of Homeland Security Vulnerability Notices to Dentrix, those pushing dental software can no longer remain hidden in an obscure niche, and can no longer say whatever it takes to make a sale. The way I interpret it, this week dental software became a buyers’ market, and vendors will either become more customer-friendly or dentists will leave them for someone who will. This week, 3 popular electronic dental record consultants revealed - for the first time ever as far as I know – serious problems associated with EDRs (that are unheard of with paper dental records). On Monday, Dr. Larry Emmott of Emmott on Technology, publicly accepted responsibility for his history of bias in an article titled, “Data Security.” “I am such a Pollyanna when it comes to technology I always see the positive side and ignore the negative. However the features that make digital technology both powerful and convenient for businesses also make it powerful and convenient for crooks to abuse your data” – Dr. Larry Emmott, June 10, 2013. emmottontechnology/security/data-security/ In today’s installment of his “EHR Countdown” on DrBicuspid, Michael Uretz, Founder and Executive Director of EHR Group, posted “Beware the fine print.” “Recently, as I was reviewing various clauses in an electronic health records (EHR) contract for a practice that had hired me to assist with the negotiations, I noticed a statement in the licensing clause that unfortunately is all too common: [Vendor] may have nonexclusive rights to aggregated and deidentified patient data and may use or disclose such deidentified data for any purpose” – Michael Uretz, June 14, 2013. drbicuspid/index.aspx?sec=sup&sub=pmt&pag=dis&ItemID=313540 Within minutes of Mike Uretz mentioning the difficulty in finding honest cloud service providers whom dentists can trust with their patients’ Protected Health Information, EDR consultant Dayna Johnson lamented on her blog about the hassle and liability of maintaining HIPAA Business Associate Agreements - which are required by federal law and enforced with huge fines. “This is a requirement for any outside agency that may have access to your patients’ PHI. Any time your office works with an attorney, consultant, CPA, hardware tech, or collection agency that has access to patient information, you must have a signed HIPAA Business Agreement and keep it in your practice’s HIPAA manual. Don’t get caught without one!” thedentrixofficemanager.blogspot/2013/06/dont-get-caught-without-one-hipaa.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheDentrixOfficeManager+%28The+Dentrix+Office+Manager%29 For a related reason, I predict that a reliable, Evidence-Based appraisal of EDRs’ cost versus benefit will justifiably come soon. It is common sense that new medical devices like EDRs should be thoroughly tested BEFORE being sold to healthcare providers to use on vulnerable, clueless patients – and long before stakeholders misled trusting dentists into believing that EDRs are mandated by federal law. What a vendor-friendly crime that turned out to be! Though I never expect official confirmation from the ADA – which I have kept informed about EDR troubles through Sharecare - I like to believe that at least a few dentists and patients who also read those articles played an important part in forcing even a little transparency from the EDR industry. Just think. If you had said nothing at all, how would your silence have possibly helped protect the welfare of patients as well as dentists? Thanks to all of you. D. Kellus Pruitt DDS cc: American Dental Association via Sharecare sharecare/static/help
Posted on: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 00:33:31 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015