Now we know that was a terrible idea with devastating consequences. But we didn't know better and truly thought we were doing right by our patients. It's hard to imagine a programmer without medical training could be blamed.
Now we know that was a terrible idea with devastating consequences. But we didn't know better and truly thought we were doing right by our patients. It's hard to imagine a programmer without medical training could be blamed.
The CDC itself stated in April of 2019:
"CDC Advises Against Misapplication of the Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain Some policies, practices attributed to the Guideline are inconsistent with its recommendations"
Sadly the medical community is not getting that message due to this mater now becoming political.
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2019/s0424-advises-misapp...
Providers are under the microscope for opioids now, so why risk it, it's not their pain. Medicine is a rough field.
Dr Mark Ibsen is one of the five stories. He lost everything for helping those with Chronic Pain. Five of his patients killed themselves when he was no longer able to prescribe. The medical board said he was over prescribing, that blood is on the boards hands. The arbitrator/judge in the case said that Mark did not do anything wrong, yet The System destroyed him.
Yes it is a rough field. I see it every single day in advocating for those that the Medical Establishment has forsaken.
There are bad doctors, there are bad people writing medical software as this thread explains. They need dealt with.
Practice Fusion knew that at the time. Internal emails released as part of the legal process make it clear that this feature was designed to get previously "opioid naive" patient (people not previously prescribed opioids) hooked on extended release opioids. This was specifically done to address the falling rates of ERO prescriptions, which the pharma company described as being due to "political reasons".
The software developers are not protected by the "standard of care" shield. The software developers, like just about every other profession are held to a higher standard than MDs, namely "ordinary care" or "reasonable care".
Is a software company taking reasonable care to avoid harm when it builds a software feature that secretly encourages doctors to issue dangerous prescriptions? I don't know -- doesn't sound like it to me. Though there are probably a few plaintiff's attorneys willing to find out how a jury thinks about it.
It's probably also not great for patients with rare diseases, that physicians are penalized for trying to solve problems no physician has solved before.
Though, I think we agree that you cannot make an ethical decision on which action you should take unless you have any idea of what the consequences of your actions will be.
Sure, but I would have expected that there would have been some perplexities by the actual doctors when they were presented these popups at each patient data access.