I think this is more related to how the Hospital is managed and how resources are allocated for these types of services. There should be a specialist to provide these types of support, both one site and from the 3rd Party.
Also, with the cost that goes into R&D for that type of equipment, you would think they would put a little more effort to have it be more user friendly and robust (it should use rechargeable batteries, and look more slick, in a more protective enclosure and not have the wires sticking out). Heck, it should be water and shock proof.
This tells us what are the priorities of the companies that develop this technology, to rush it out the door and make a quick buck, and not think of ongoing support.
(it should use rechargeable batteries, and look more slick, in a more protective enclosure and not have the wires sticking out). Heck, it should be water and shock proof.
@Mejiac, even though some might think that's asking a lot for something that's already expensive, state-of-the-art technology, as you say, it's for that exact reason that your suggestion makes sense. Most of those things don't seem like they'd make too much dent in an already $8,000 price tag.
I always hesitate to criticize if I'm on the outside looking in. But in this case I have to agree that it seems like there's some disconnect between the device's development and the places it's expected to go in real use.
the internal IT staff issue raises an interesting question; no doubt, hospitals have a large number of expensive, specialized devices like this one, and it's hard to blame their IT staff for not knowing all of them, if they're the same size as a normal IT shop and also have all the regular responsibilities. However, is it that they don't know any of the devices, or that they have to prioritize some over others, and leave the rest to the third parties? If it's the latter, What criteria do they use? It's something I'd love to know more about.
if the IT staff doesn't have the manpower to take care of this task, is it the hospital's fault for not hiring more/appropriate staff, the developers of the device for making it too much for the lay-ITmen to figure it out, or the industry's fault for not recognizing this need to begin with? these are not easy questions to answer.
@Nicky48 Thanks. The sock is not my favorite look, but it's not like I was going to the prom or something. And although it's never comfortable to sleep with an electronic ponytail, it's much better than a couple years ago when I was in the hospital for a week, with my long wiry ponytail plugged into the wall. That was less fun.
@zerox203 You raise so many excellent questions. I wish I had answers for them, and I'll see if I can find some. I don't think it's necessary for the hospital IT staff to be expert in all of these specialized medical devices -- that's what the medical technicians are for. But I've got to imagine that there are plenty of instances in which the IT people should at least have an awareness of what's going on with these devices. I wonder if the CIO is involved at all in the purchasing decisions for these tools...
I think they have the right intention, to improve the accuracy but also patient satisfaction as you say, a couple of years ago it was a week stay and sleeping in the hospital with a bulky device. But the execution is falling down it seems. The hospital should be saving money with the less costly procedure (outpatient now vs. inpatient) so maybe they should divert that savings into training, reinvesting savings into training and innovation is key. Or maybe the manufacturer could be better about not only handing it off to the hospital/IT but writing an end-user guide (or video) that would maybe close the loop but also differentiate them in the market.
@MariaB That's a great suggestion -- having the manufacturer write a guide or video for the person hooked up to the machine, as well as some guide/training for the IT staff so that they understand the basics. (Maybe then they could at least stock up on extra batteries, or better document data archiving and data security processes, what-have-you.)
I should say that thusfar I've never had a problem. My electrodes have never come undone and I haven't had a battery failure and I haven't dipped the whole thing in the bathtub. And yes, the outpatient procedure is not just cheaper, it's also theoretically produces more valuable results because the patient has the opportunity to continue their normal behavior instead of sitting in a hospital room all day. (Although I'm too vain to hang out in public with that crap on my head, so it's not ENTIRELY normal behavior.) So overall the system isn't bad, as long as your EEG technicians are great (which mine is) and your patient is careful.
But if I were responsible for risk management, security, compliance, or disaster recovery at the hospital, I'd be nervous.
Enterprise Efficiency is looking for engaged readers to moderate the message boards on this site. Engage in high-IQ conversations with IT industry leaders; earn kudos and perks. Interested? E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Now that TGen has broken new ground in genomic research by using Dell's storage, cloud, and high-performance computing solutions, the company discusses what will come next for it and for personalized medicine.
The Translational Genomics Research Institute wanted to save lives, but its efforts were hobbled by immense computing challenges related to collecting, processing, sharing, and storing enormous amounts of data.
At the GigaOM Structure conference, a startup announced a cloud and virtualization storage optimizing approach that shows there's still a lot of thinking to be done on the way storage joins the virtual world.
We always hear about "Big" data, but a real issue in cloud storage is not just bigness but also persistence. A large data model is less complicated than a big application repository that somehow needs to be accessed. The Hadoop send-program-to-data model may be the answer.
EMC's Project Lightning has matured into a product set, and it's important, less because it has new features or capabilities in storage technology and management, than because it may package the state of the art in a way more businesses can deploy.