Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Wednesday March 27 2019, @10:22PM   Printer-friendly
from the frmForm1 dept.

Submitted via IRC for Bytram

Death by a Thousand Clicks: Where Electronic Health Records Went Wrong

The pain radiated from the top of Annette Monachelli’s head, and it got worse when she changed positions. It didn’t feel like her usual migraine. The 47-year-old Vermont attorney turned innkeeper visited her local doctor at the Stowe Family Practice twice about the problem in late November 2012, but got little relief.

Two months later, Monachelli was dead of a brain aneurysm, a condition that, despite the symptoms and the appointments, had never been tested for or diagnosed until she turned up in the emergency room days before her death.

Monachelli’s husband sued Stowe, the federally qualified health center the physician worked for. Owen Foster, a newly hired assistant U.S. attorney with the District of Vermont, was assigned to defend the government. Though it looked to be a standard medical malpractice case, Foster was on the cusp of discovering something much bigger—what his boss, U.S. Attorney Christina Nolan, calls the “frontier of health care fraud”—and prosecuting a first-of-its-kind case that landed the largest-ever financial recovery in Vermont’s history.

Foster began with Monachelli’s medical records, which offered a puzzle. Her doctor had considered the possibility of an aneurysm and, to rule it out, had ordered a head scan through the clinic’s software system, the government alleged in court filings. The test, in theory, would have caught the bleeding in Monachelli’s brain. But the order never made it to the lab; it had never been transmitted.

The software in question was an electronic health records system, or EHR, made by eClinicalWorks (eCW), one of the leading sellers of record-keeping software for physicians in America, currently used by 850,000 health professionals in the U.S. It didn’t take long for Foster to assemble a dossier of troubling reports—Better Business Bureau complaints, issues flagged on an eCW user board, and legal cases filed around the country—suggesting the company’s technology didn’t work quite like it said it did.

Until this point, Foster, like most Americans, knew next to nothing about electronic medical records, but he was quickly amassing clues that eCW’s software had major problems—some of which put patients, like Annette Monachelli, at risk.

Damning evidence came from a whistleblower claim filed in 2011 against the company. Brendan Delaney, a British cop turned EHR expert, was hired in 2010 by New York City to work on the eCW implementation at Rikers Island, a jail complex that then had more than 100,000 inmates. But soon after he was hired, Delaney noticed scores of troubling problems with the system, which became the basis for his lawsuit. The patient medication lists weren’t reliable; prescribed drugs would not show up, while discontinued drugs would appear as current, according to the complaint. The EHR would sometimes display one patient’s medication profile accompanied by the physician’s note for a different patient, making it easy to misdiagnose or prescribe a drug to the wrong individual. Prescriptions, some 30,000 of them in 2010, lacked proper start and stop dates, introducing the opportunity for under- or overmedication. The eCW system did not reliably track lab results, concluded Delaney, who tallied 1,884 tests for which they had never gotten outcomes.

The District of Vermont launched an official federal investigation in 2015.

eCW’s spaghetti code was so buggy that when one glitch got fixed, another would develop, the government found. The user interface offered a few ways to order a lab test or diagnostic image, for example, but not all of them seemed to function. The software would detect and warn users of dangerous drug interactions, but unbeknownst to physicians, the alerts stopped if the drug order was customized. “It would be like if I was driving with the radio on and the windshield wipers going and when I hit the turn signal, the brakes suddenly didn’t work,” says Foster.

The eCW system also failed to use the standard drug codes, and in some instances, lab and diagnosis codes as well, the government alleged.

The case never got to a jury. In May 2017, eCW paid a $155 million settlement to the government over alleged “false claims” and kickbacks—one physician made tens of thousands of dollars—to clients who promoted its product. Despite the record settlement, the company denied wrongdoing; eCW did not respond to numerous requests for comment.

If there is a kicker to this tale, it is this: The U.S. government bankrolled the adoption of this software—and continues to pay for it. Or we should say: You do.

Which brings us to the strange, sad, and aggravating story that unfolds below. It is not about one lawsuit or a piece of sloppy technology. Rather, it’s about a trouble-prone industry that intersects, in the most personal way, with every one of our lives. It’s about a $3.7-trillion-dollar health care system idling at the crossroads of progress. And it’s about a slew of unintended consequences—the surprising casualties of a big idea whose time had seemingly come.

[Click through to read a whole lot more.]


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 28 2019, @10:58AM (1 child)

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Thursday March 28 2019, @10:58AM (#821251) Homepage Journal

    True but if a human being fucks something up, I have both someone to blame and recourse. This is not the case with software.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by choose another one on Thursday March 28 2019, @03:16PM

    by choose another one (515) Subscriber Badge on Thursday March 28 2019, @03:16PM (#821349)

    > True but if a human being fucks something up, I have both someone to blame and recourse.

    If the _system_ fucks up, you don't, whether it's hardware or software or wetware.

    I have been involved with EHR software projects, I've seen some of the stats on paper medical records failures, it _should_ be scaring us but it isn't because it's been normalized.

    I have also personally experienced the paper medical records failures in my own medical care - the cost was half a day of my time wasted, an hour of consultant haematologist time wasted and who knows how much wasted behind the scenes, but nobody dies because it wasn't an urgent appointment when the haem didn't have my notes, if it had been, and if I hadn't been capable of filing in some gaps from my memory and my records... who knows.

    Who fucked up? I _don't_ _know_ - no one did.
    - The notes were with a courier between buildings - I'd seen a different specialist the day before
    - The transfer was correctly booked for the two appointments in two different buildings
    - The courier had picked them up for transfer within his SLA time
    - The courier delivered within SLA time - after my appointment

    It wasn't the couriers fault, or the consultants fault, or the one the previous day, or the receptionists in either department who booked the appointments, in fact it was the systems fault, or more precisely the lack of any system to join up appointments in multiple departments and flag that the notes were not going to get between them in time with the courier service - a smart-ish centralised appointment booking system _or_ an EHR would have prevented this.

    Most interesting observation though was receptionist response: [looks through notes on counter] [checks my name again] [looks again] [shouts "any notes for a Mr X" to someone else] [further two filing trolleys searched] [phones someone] [rolls eyes] "sorry, your notes are still in transit, happens all the time, take a seat in the waiting area".

    Every single time an EHR can be accessed from two places/times faster than paper can get between them, it's a win. A small fraction of those wins will change a medical outcome. A small fraction of those changed outcomes will save a life. AND NO ONE WILL NOTICE. Instant access to electronic records is normalized, failure to access paper records is also normalized. But if EHR fails, all hell breaks loose.

    Self-driving car kills someone - all over the media. Human driven cars kill 100 people in one day (in US) - NO ONE NOTICES. That failure is normalized.

    Don't get me wrong, EHRs have a shed load of problems and companies will be hiding defects as they always do etc. - but it isn't a fair analysis unless you look at the saves and the paper system failures. Nothing is perfect, you can't save everyone all the time, you _will_ kill people some of the time (in EHR projects), your aim is to kill fewer people than the previous system, and you need to be comfortable that you have done that because NO ONE WILL NOTICE. They will only notice the ones you kill.