On Monday 25 September 2006 10:17, Cedric Meyerowitz wrote:
> David you raise some interesting & valid points here.
>
> My input: If your data gets corrupted, or some goes missing, we don't have
> the money to take HCN to court - they will claim that it is not their
> software, but something else. Also they will deny that data corruption
> occurs / goes missing.
>
> I still frequently see new partients that move to my area. Well controlled
> Hypertension, yet previous GP's would not give repeats. Why not - so
> patient has to come every month so GP can make money. How many Dr's charge
> for Rpt scripts. Most I know of. Why? To make more money.
No, because if i do this service for nothing, the patient has no incentive to
actually come and get proper checks.
> Surely to
> open patient file, click drug and print is so simple, yet we charge for it
> ??
Absolutely. I need to make >$250 an hour to make a profit which is worth going
to work for (as a business owner). so the 3 minute job of printing a script -
ensuring it is appropriate, not too early, not too late, and that the person
doesn't need review is $12.50. I'm selling myself short at $6. Thanks for
making me work it out.
>
> Patient phone for new referral to see specialist. Most get told to came &
> see GP so they can be charged (even if it is just a bulk-bill item 3).
A new referral can take me lots of time. as a moderate ability typist with a
supply of envelopes and paper, more time is spent sorting out the why and
wherefore. A (HIC) legal referral requires that I have put in thought
concerning the necessity of the referral etc. $10 is obviously too cheap too.
> So
> we as Dr's also charge for things that is so easy as "just tighten this
> screw and system will work" and there is no charge.
>
> Patient needs follow-up lipids. Click & print. Patient phones for
> results. No, come & see me so I can tell you it is still normal. Why ?
> Because GP's wants to make more money.
Because I have an objection to doing unpaid work. Actually I will call people
back about results but the receptionist can identify normal results from the
computer listing and tell the customer that it is marked "Normal-no action"
even though she can't even see exactly which test it is, nor any results
themselves.
>
> Years ago the "source code" of Lanoxin was made available. Within days
> there was a generic on the market. Within weeks it was removed from the
> market as it weas discovered it doesn't work. It is now 20 years later &
> nobody copied it. The only company who now makes a generic is the original
> manufacturer.
there were many brands of digoxin many years ago. It is of course a natural
substance from the digitalis plant.
It turned out that only Lanoxin had any effective ingredients and the rest
were removed for being useless.
>
> Etc, etc, etc
etc etc
>
> Cedric
> ___________________________________________________________________________
>_ ______________________________________________
--
It's there as a sop to former Ada programmers. :-)
-- Larry Wall regarding 10_000_000 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
