首页> 外文期刊>JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association >Professionalism and the Review of Systems
【24h】

Professionalism and the Review of Systems

机译:专业性和系统审查

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

To the Editor The Viewpoint by Dr Hendrickson and colleagues on review of systems (ROS) and electronic health record (EHR) systems suggested reimbursement incentives might encourage clinicians to complete, or falsely claim to have completed, a full ROS, even when not clinically useful.1 The authors noted that EHR systems can facilitate false documentation when “a generic phrase asserting that the ROS was conducted is automatically included in physician note templates” or “a single mouse click in a series of required clicks records its completion,” and that “a prepopulated attestation statement endorsing that a 10-point ROS was completed may have the unintended effect of introducing dishonesty….” I share this concern and propose that physicians demand greater control of EHR functionalities and eschew functionalities that set them up to fail.
机译:对于编辑由Hendrickson博士和同事们进行审查的观点(ROS)和电子健康记录(EHR)系统建议报销激励可能鼓励临床医生完成,或者错误地声称已经完成了全面的RO,即使在临床上没有临床有用 .1作者指出,当“宣传所进行的通用短语自动包含在医生笔记模板”或“一系列所需点击中的单击记录其完成”时,EHR系统可以促进错误的文档。 “预先批准一个10点ROS完成的预先妥善的证明声明可能具有引入不诚实的意外效果......” 我分享了这个问题,并提出了医生要求更大控制EHR功能和避暑函数,使他们失败。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号