The endemic problem at VA is administrative incompetence, cover up and blame someone else not be accountable for their inactions.

Any idiot with two cents worth of brains would know this!

But the Doctor holds the most responsibility, did he not use a scope to monitor his work, actions, progress?

Did they not do any immediate follow-up tests to confirm proper placement? The obvious answer would be no!

The VA needs to stand tall and accept full responsibility for not maintaining properly, well education, highly trained professionals who are FULLY license to practice medicine, technical and nursing staff all with proper credential and highly trained in their fields/profession!

No more passing the buck!

Jim Davis
President
Veterans-For-Change
JDAVIS92840@SBCGLOBAL.NET
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VETERANS-FOR-CHANGE/

What WON’T THEY LIE  ABOUT????

      Mr. Hanafin the front pages of the Philadelphia Inquirer carried this story for most of early July, and states that Dr. Koa, the University of Pennsylvania doctor on loan to the VA was singled out by the VA to take the blame, but most medical professionals  realize no one doctor acts alone. In this case, we have the Nuclear Regulatory Commission a federal entity shares part of the blame, and Dr. Richard Whittington, Associate Professor of Radiation Oncology at The Abramson Cancer Center of the University of Pennsylvania, a radiologist all covered up things as well.

      Senator Spector et al did NOT speak with the NRC and Whittington at the Senate hearings that were held.

      Ironically, as Dr. Koa was being singled out by the VA to take the fall for the Philly VAMC scandal, the female physcians at Bay Pines VAMC were awarded 3.7 million for VA Reprisal and are going back to work there.

      What’s been exposed about the VA thus far is only the tip of the iceberg. More examples:
Synthes INC, [us.synthes.com]the global medical device giant, provided spinal cement that killed 4 VA patients with the Spinal cement used illegally. The VA refuses to identify which VAs and 4 dead Veterans. Synthes is l ess than 30 miles from both the Phila [us.synthes.com]delphia and Wilmington VAMCs and only 60 miles from VA Hospitals in Maryland.

      In addition, a  VA Colorado Technician was charged criminally for giving Veterans and other patients in the area Hepicitus C. The Colorado state attorney general has been looking into this one.

       Mr. Hanafin all one needs to do, especially members of Congress on the House and Veterans Affairs Committees, is to review just how hugh the systemic problems with the VA are by getting the VA watch dog daily items.

Health Care Renewal

  Addressing threats to health care’s core values, especially those stemming from concentration and abuse of power.

      A doctor writing for Healthcare Renewal [www.hcrenewal.blogspot.com] noted that remarkable accommodation is often given to IT personnel in hospitals, even when these personnel make decisions that are contrary to the support of the mission of healthcare organizations. Many health IT problems appeared due to ill-informed, edicts of over empowered Medical Information System leaders, (relative to clinical leadership) sanctioned by equally ill-informed executive administrative leadership, for which the IT personnel were rarely held accountable.

       Endangerment of ICU patients [www.ischool.drexel.edu] via PC’s is entirely inappropriate for a biohazards environment, chaos in a critical procedure area [www.ischool.drexel.edu] from IT complacency and incompetence, payment of millions of dollars for Health IT with gross defects rendering it unusable [www.ischool.drexel.edu] by clinicians without consultation of in-house medical informatics expertise, and denial of access for hundreds of drug discovery scientists [www.ischool.drexel.edu] to the informatics tools their own leaders said were essential to new drug discovery are just a few of the situations observed due to IT department whimsy.

      Remarkably, none of these situations nor others reported from numerous sources resulted in repercussions against the IT deities (other than, in some cases, generous promotions), thereby obstructing reform of the attitudinal and competency problems that created the scenarios. If physicians had it this good, they’d be chopping off wrong limbs, removing the wrong organs, and failing to diagnose and treat with impunity.

       Back in June 2009 a clinical debacle of national import unfolding at the Philadelphia VA hospital entitled " Bungled Brachytherapy, Computer Interfaces and Other Mysteries At The Philadelphia Veterans Administration Hospital [hcrenewal.blogspot.com]":

       A question was raised about being uncertain how "computer interface problems" (in the Philadelphia Inquirer [www.philly.com], they were referred to as "glitches") prevented medical personnel from determining treatment success over several years. I would be most interested in hearing more about these "interface problems." That question has now been answered, and the thought that perhaps some arcane coding or driver configuration was the culprit at the VAMC Philadelphia. That was not the case.

      Their investigative reports blamed a "computer interface problem" – the same terminology Dr. Kao used during his testimony last month at a congressional hearing.       The implication was that some intractable technology breakdown was behind the lapse in care [i.e., some cryptic problem requiring magical incantations and byzantine scripts that mere mortals could not understand nor remedy.]

      The computer was initially unplugged so that another medical device could use the network port. Then, various departments dithered and ducked a request for an additional network port, which was finally installed – after a year.

"Various departments dithered and ducked?" Which departments, exactly?

[Here we have medical professionals raising the same questions we at Veterans Today did. VT, ed.]

       When asked why they didn’t tell the hospital’s patient-safety officer, they said "it had not occurred to them to do so."

["Had not occurred to them to do so?" I've seen situations where physicians and scientists were afraid of IT leaders, due to the latter's often overinflated political influence and proficiency in playing games of political intrigue. Did this occur here, I wonder?]

      So, it appears that for the want of one network connection, installed by one competent, industrious, non-complacent IT person, a national scandal has erupted that has injured many Veterans.

      I note again that multiple people failed here, including executives, physicians, safety officers, etc. I believe responsibility needs to be fairly assigned. However, IT needs to be included. I’ve witnessed or heard about too many Health IT incidents where IT personnel and leadership remained scot-free when their behavior and attitudes were contributors or root causes.

       As per my letter to the editor published in JAMA on July 22, " Health Care Information Technology, Hospital Responsibilities, and Joint Commission Standards [jama.ama-assn.org]", IT privilege and accommodation must stop. Heathcare IT is not business IT used for widget inventory or payroll. As the VA incident shows, patient lives and well being are at stake.

More on this from a blog on medical physics, "The Sharp End of the Photon", here [www.drflounder.com]:

… the errors in the placement of the radioactive seeds went undiscovered for so long because post-implant dosimetry was not performed. This involves CT scanning the patient, finding the positions of the seeds and calculating the ultimate dose the patient received. In the NRC report, the explanation was that a problem with the interface between the CT scanner and the treatment planning computer prevented transferring the CT images.

       First, the following questions regarding the "various departments" that "dithered and ducked" the responsibility to install an additional network connection in the brachytherapy suite:

         Was the job the responsibility of the Department of Medicine? The doctors and nurses? Could they have done so?

• Perhaps it was the responsibility of the Public Relations Department (who now has to pick up the pieces?)
• Was it the responsibility of the Facilities Department?
• Was it the responsibility of the Housekeeping Department?
• Or, was it the responsibility of the IT Department and CIO?

(If you need help answering these questions, stop reading now.)

• Why was the IT department’s failing to perform this task kept low profile through use of cryptic "interface problem" language that implied complex IT problems, as opposed to simple people problems?
• Who originated this language?
• Did they believe the truth could remain hidden?
• Why do we use the term "medical malpractice" to describe negligence in medical care, not "provider glitch?" Why the different standards?

      I can visualize what went on behind the scenes in the IT department, refrains I have heard before – "we don’t have the resources … we need to hold more meetings to consider the issues … it’s the vendor’s responsibility … it’s the network group’s job, not the hardware group … putting a new network outlet in there will cause packet storms and interfere with system XYZ … we need to get consensus …. you [doctors] can’t understand the complexities of the problem, but don’t worry, we’ll make it better … hey, the docs don’t need it anyway …"

      What would happen to, say, the Facilities Department if a plumbing problem led to failure of a piece of vital equipment in the OR’s, and they failed to repair it for a year?

      This is not to excuse the multiple layers of complacency among clinicians, safety staff, and others for toleration of this network denial situation and the lack of QC on the procedures themselves, but at the heart of this debacle is this attitude, which seems common in hospital IT departments:

"Doctors and nurses toil in hospitals so IT personnel can have comfy jobs and nifty computers."

      Perhaps on this occasion, IT leaders and personnel may end up on the witness stand and be held accountable, and perhaps lose their jobs instead of being promoted.

       However, even this is doubtful, and it has taken a congressional investigation led by Sen. Arlen Specter to get even this far, to simply find out that the mysterious "interface glitches" were a lack of a network jack due to laziness and complacency.

      Finally, I point out that it is hospital IT personnel upon whom clinicians will depend for acquisition and implementation of the Health IT tools the President of the United States said are essential to changing the culture of healthcare. As I have written, before the IT profession can change the culture of healthcare (in a positive manner, that is), its own culture must change. IT personnel in hospitals must become part of the clinical team and support the mission of clinicians, not the other way around.

A "problem with the interface", indeed.

Also provided is a link to testimonies from witnesses at the house.gov website, which are here [www.drflounder.com].

Notable is the absence of any testimony from IT leadership. The only allusion to IT is in testimony by the doctor who performed the procedures who stated:

"There should be a method of categorizing systematic problems by level of urgency so that serious problems, such as those involving failures of medical equipment or transfer of patient-related data, will receive immediate attention from the proper personnel and be quickly resolved."

Perhaps, but not in this case. A simple phone call to IT should have been adequate to resolve this particular simple problem.

Links to this post [hcrenewal.blogspot.com]

http://www.hcrenewal.blogspot.com/ [www.hcrenewal.blogspot.com]