Jeremy Rogers wrote:
> I
> would assume that the pharmas will respond to attempts to build desktop
> prescribing support tools in various ways, ranging from discrediting the
> whole process to flooding the decision making bodies with inconclusive trial
> results that make it harder to decide what's best.
>
> But even if the pharmas did conclude that their vested interests are best
> protected by killing prescribing support dead....
>
I don't think this is happening at all... I think the
pharma's are promoting prescribing systems that make it
easier to prescribe the latests and greatest drug that has
that <.05 improvement, but it will be based on evidence from
clinical trials....
The debate is not about whether there will be prescribing
systems, but rather about to what purpose they will be
designed to foster!
Come on folks, this is really BIG money and substantial
portion of the west's GNP at stake. There will be more
computer systems in health care. Practitioner's will be
enmeshed in all kinds of systems that will require
interaction at nearly every phase of care delivery. The
issue is who will design these systems and for what purpose?
This forum is about open systems. Is there a successful
argument that open systems will deliver, say a prescribing
system, that follows a different (and better?) purpose then
the other 20 or so commerical prescribing systems?
