On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:13, Andrew Cameron wrote: > Thanks for the positive input John. (wow is that allowed on this list :) > > I am keeping as open a mind as i can on MDW3 for now. > Having seen some horrible things with MDW2 lately, > Like patient histories going missing. > > Andrew C.
I've just been off seeing a variety of practices, 7 different sites. What I found saddest was a belief by many docs that MDW2 was 'state of the art'. I expressed sadness to same that they had computerised late and still chosen MDW2. I've had to check patient history lists (privacy act ok, formal trial situation) to ensure that the evidence existed that the people enrolled on the trial had the specified conditions. In one practice I had to search specialist letters and path reports to find the evidence, no health summaries up to date, and others had good records. The computerised (fully) practices won hands down. One practice I wouldn't do a locum in, not because they had MSS Classic, but because there was nothing useful in the notes and I'd have to construct a history list on any patient with more than URTI/LRTI to deal with them. Many users have poor computer skills and mouse their way all over the place with no understanding of keyboard shortcuts. One practice had M$ Multimedia keyboards installed and the Function keys were disabled. I think I only came across one practice on MDW3. LIz -- The PILLSBURY DOUGHBOY is CRYING for an END to BURT REYNOLDS movies!! _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
