IT investments: How can healthcare organizations avoid coming down with Bright Shiny Object syndrome?

« Back to Previous Page
74
0
At NewYork-Presbyterian (NYP), we evaluate and develop new technology to serve our patients and providers. However, we also aim to...

Please to read the entire article.

Marked as spam
Posted by Daniel Barchi (Discussions: 1, Comments: 0)
Replied on May 17, 2017 12:00 am
6 views
Private comment
I agree with your breakdown of 80% People, 15% Process and 5% Technology but what you are missing is it is 100% about the Patient. The People, Process and Technology must support the Patient 100%.
Marked as spam
Posted by Robert Walker (Discussions: 0, Comments: 1)
Replied on May 16, 2017 8:00 pm

    That is a great comment.

    (John Jones at May 25, 2017 9:21 am)
      Private comment
      I totally agree with the formulation in #1. I've seen too often where the technology was chosen because it was the "trend" (or fad, fashion, whatever term you wish to use). Only after the purchase was made without any forethought and it was handed to IT to implement along with an unreasonable budget and schedule was any thought given to purpose, functionality, integration, and most importantly of all, feasibility. When the project ends in less than stellar condition, it's usually the heads of those responsible for the implementation that roll -- not the ones who made the decision in the first place.
      Marked as spam
      Posted by Aaron Cutshall (Discussions: 0, Comments: 1)
      Replied on May 16, 2017 8:00 pm
        Private comment
        Great piece Daniel Barchi! I would add that people should be looking to invest in platforms (multi use case) instead of point solutions (single use case). In addition, open standards based video platforms will have far more use cases than closed proprietary ones. We believe unified telemedicine is the future and we bring multiple specialities to bear over 60k times per month at over 650 hospitals, allowing hospitals to collaborate, share resources and reduce health disparities through leveraging their existing infrastructure.
        Marked as spam
        Posted by James "Jamey" Edwards (Discussions: 0, Comments: 2)
        Replied on May 16, 2017 8:00 pm
          Private comment
          Great insights Dan. Technology is not everything, but at a minimum it must - and with the right partners can - help healthcare providers increase thru-put at less cost and with better outcomes in great orders of magnitude. A 3x volume minimum on a lower expense base is what technology has given other industries that underwent rationalization (retail, energy, etc.); the enablement of greater margin at higher volume, in the hands of strong healthcare leaders, will also provide for better outcomes with the right technology deployed intelligently into clinical workflows.
          Marked as spam
          Posted by Stephen Keeler (Discussions: 0, Comments: 1)
          Replied on May 16, 2017 8:00 pm
            Private comment
            Well said! I've been selling technology for 30 years and my biggest challenge is un-selling technology that is perceived to be the be all to end all.
            Marked as spam
            Posted by Doug Padgett (Discussions: 0, Comments: 1)
            Replied on May 16, 2017 8:00 pm
              Private comment
              Great Article Daniel. Healthcare providers looking at significant digital infrastructure investments should be conscious of both the challenges and opportunities under the currently regulatory framework There are opportunity through permissible EHR donation arrangements and programs like the Healthcare Connect Fund (FCC), but also challenges as information technology is increasingly being used as a regulatory compliance tool by federal and state administrative agencies. Insufficient oversight or failing to have sufficient technological flexibility may result in reimbursement adjustments under MACRA/MIPS requirements or Meaningful Use.
              Marked as spam
              Posted by Ammon Fillmore (Discussions: 0, Comments: 1)
              Replied on May 17, 2017 8:00 pm
                Private comment
                No patients, no doctors, no doctors, no technology to help them serve the patient.
                Marked as spam
                Posted by Kurt Badstübner (Discussions: 0, Comments: 1)
                Replied on May 17, 2017 8:00 pm
                  Private comment
                  Hi Daniel, thanks for sharing your great experiences and Congratulations on results. To make progress, colleagues need to be able to quickly frame their priorities within the context of their technical and organizational strategy. I have written this post to help you to do that quickly: https://medium.com/@SherriDouville/how-to-guide-for-framing-my-thesis-risk-appetite-for-digital-health-1165619e9fcb
                  Marked as spam
                  Posted by Sherri Douville (Discussions: 0, Comments: 1)
                  Replied on May 17, 2017 8:00 pm
                    Private comment
                    Great tips and insights Daniel Barchi! Looking forward to your Twitter Chat June 8th!
                    Marked as spam
                    Posted by Janet Guptill, FACHE (Discussions: 0, Comments: 4)
                    Replied on May 17, 2017 8:00 pm
                      Private comment
                      Thank you for sharing your insights. Regarding process. Many will ask to change a process or practice in conjunction with the EMR. Start the new process now. The perils and pitfalls of a new process will be evaluated well before go live. The resistance to change in the process will be evaluated and any changes to the process can be built into the EMR.
                      Marked as spam
                      Posted by Ann Marie Tyrell (Discussions: 0, Comments: 1)
                      Replied on May 17, 2017 8:00 pm
                        Private comment
                        People, process, technology!
                        Marked as spam
                        Posted by Anthony Brockman, MSHI, CPHIMS (Discussions: 0, Comments: 1)
                        Replied on May 17, 2017 8:00 pm
                          « Back to Previous Page