Healthcare providers, just like ordinary human beings, make mistakes. Unknown is the fact that these mistakes occur more often than not; from botched surgeries, administration of overdoses and wrong prescriptions, among many others. However, in an effort to create awareness, this article strives to analyze few pertinent issues that can enlighten patients. There are several ways through which patients find credible information, one of which is through healthcare information technology. Health facilities usually provide some of their basic information online. Patients can then be able to access them through the perusal of services provided and available facilities, giving them an upper hand in determining what suits best (Zafar & Sneha, 2012). Most professionals give valid information on websites, hence, such can be trustworthy.
Patients also usually share personal healthcare experiences. The way a person was treated in a particular health facility determines how they describe it. One can, therefore, get reliable data on the dependability of a professional healthcare provider. Preferred facilities are normally described enthusiastically as opposed to those deemed to be of lower standards. Emergency situations may not allow one to be taken to their healthcare facility of choice. Nonetheless, a situation arises where one is forced to make do with what is available. Upon medical treatment, one can be able to deduce whether the facility handled one well, and yearn to know more about it. This enhances the development of valid information through what can be termed as trial and error (Gibson et al., 2003).
Surprisingly enough, some do and others do not. Most patients who investigate normally have greater access to service providers’ information, probably through the internet or taking advantage of their proximity to various healthcare facilities. They, therefore, go to great lengths in research to evaluate which health provider best suit them. By the time a suitable choice is made, all the pros and cons are considered, ensuring that there is maximum faith in their decision.
The other group that does not investigate mostly relies on complaints and compliments from third parties. These people enquire from friends, family, nurses, or even patients within the facility. They tend to trust information passed on to them by word of mouth, thus, do not investigate further. Most of my friends and family adopt the latter as they believe that if it was possible for their predecessor, then why not for them too.
Medical errors are normally covered up more than they are prevented. The system can be blamed partly due to miscommunication between physicians and nurses. In order to improve this, technology can be amended to ensure proper communication, at the same time encouraging teamwork, whereby, not individual capacity is used as a determinant but the life of the patient is the priority (Gibson et. al, 2003).
Education for continuing practitioners ensures they are kept abreast of new developments, while simulators for new practitioners ensure they adapt to the system. This creates a basis for which employees can be accredited, reimbursed, or even improved.
The system also encourages physicians to admit their mistakes, thence, taking more responsibility and improving one’s own safety.
All these measures ensure proper regulatory and professional conduct, improving the lives of people. Weaknesses in healthcare system are inevitable. Shedding light on healthcare provision, as such, seeks to improve the veracity of both service providers, and patients.
Gibson, .R, and Janardan, S.P (2003), Wall of Silence: The Untold Story of the Medical MistakesThat Kill and Injure Millions of Americans. Washington, D.C.: Life Line Press; Lanham, MD.
Zafar, H., & Sneha, S. (2012). Ubiquitous Healthcare Information System: Toward Crossing the Security Chasm. Communications Of The Association For Information Systems, 31193-206.