Could Computers Replace Human Jobs Soon?

[mikapple]

There's a reason why pharmacists can dispense medications and doctors can't. It adds an extra layer of security. You wouldn't be surprised to know how often patients go see several different doctors, and fail to inform these doctors of the medications they are taking from other doctors. However, they often go to one pharmacist. So, when the pharmacist sees your on blood pressure medication and you have a prescription for viagra, they can say something.

I don't know what do you mean by doctors can't dispense medication. They can dispense whatever they want.

And I don't know if you have worked at the retail pharmacy, they actually use computer program to check for reactions. You will see tons of warnings and pop up screen when you use these program. And the pharmacists is the ones who choose which one to be put on the vials. So, checking for interactions is actually well being done by computers now.

People are getting medicine from different pharmacies with different pharmacists at different hours. There's no way for us to track all the drugs you are taking unless you are 100% sure you came here all the time. I guess the entity that knows best about your medicines you are taking is the insurance company, because they are paying for it, they track what, where, when!

I won't call it a redundancy, a double check is good for the system. But at the same time, I think patients should be responsible for the medicine they are taking. Also they should be honest with their drug history, because that's the most efficient way for the system, if he would prefer dying than letting a physician know he has ED, I don't want what to say.

 

[mgb_phys]

While supervising never hurts, I think chances of human error are much higher than chances of computer screwing up.

According to the IoM (http://www.iom.edu/ ) there are 1.5M prescription errors each year in the US leading to 7000 deaths.

But is also says: "in any given week four out of every five U.S. adults will use prescription medicines, over-the-counter (OTC) drugs, ..., and nearly one-third of adults will take five or more different medications."

Really ? I suppose if they are counting an occasional aspirin but that sounds like a lot of drugs!

 

[SticksandStones]

People are getting medicine from different pharmacies with different pharmacists at different hours. There's no way for us to track all the drugs you are taking unless you are 100% sure you came here all the time.

People will rarely go to different pharmacies unless one opens up in a more convenient location. Different pharmacists at the same location doesn't matter since computer logs are kept of prescriptions filled.

Other than that, I think patients should be responsible for the medicine they are taking, READ THE INSERT! Also they should be honest with their drug history, because that's the most efficient way for the system, if he would prefer dying than letting a physician know he has ED, I don't want what to say.

Patients can't be expected to know what the inserts are saying. Also, there are times when medication interactions can be safely ignored. A computer can't make that judgement call. Pharmacists spend a lot of time in school to learn these things, and have to be licensed by the state. If a pharmacist makes a mistake, their license is on the line. Their career, their livelihood, everything could be gone. Who's going to be held accountable for a potentially deadly mistake if a computer is running the show?

Really ? I suppose if they are counting an occasional aspirin but that sounds like a lot of drugs!

I was at one point on five different prescriptions for about a three month period of time. I can see how this would be possible if you're taking a medication for say two different issues, and need medications to counter-act some of the side effects of these medications.

 

[mikapple]

People will rarely go to different pharmacies unless one opens up in a more convenient location. Different pharmacists at the same location doesn't matter since computer logs are kept of prescriptions filled.

But how many times would they pull out drug history log just for you? I hardly see that in a retail pharmacy that involved a big community do it since a pharmacy that with no other competitors around is very busy.

Patients can't be expected to know what the inserts are saying.

You know if you die because you took the "wrong" drug, as long as it's prescribed by the doctors, and it's the right drug on the prescription, pharmacists are not responsible for your death, even they are the ones who gave your the medicines. But FYI, most of the drugs in a retail pharmacy is not in lethal dose, that means you won't die from taking the chemical, usually people die because the wrong drug didn't fighting their symptoms, a woman will be okay to take a viagra if they want to. They won't die from it.

Also, there are times when medication interactions can be safely ignored. A computer can't make that judgement call. Pharmacists spend a lot of time in school to learn these things, and have to be licensed by the state. If a pharmacist makes a mistake, their license is on the line. Their career, their livelihood, everything could be gone. Who's going to be held accountable for a potentially deadly mistake if a computer is running the show?

As I said earlier, retail pharmacist is just a person for legal action if there's any. I worked in the industry for 5 years, I am still wondering why they got paid 5X+ more while I am the one who did all the work. I know they have spent many years in school studying, but I clearly don't see them using their knowledge that much. And, as we saw, a lot of work is now assisted by computer.

I truly think efficiency is what that keep the society moving. If they are going to school learning chuck load of information just for the legal protection of a company, isn't that inefficient?

 

[Borek]

READ THE INSERT!

Patients can't be expected to know what the inserts are saying.

So, what are these inserts printed for?

Also, there are times when medication interactions can be safely ignored. A computer can't make that judgement call. Pharmacists spend a lot of time in school to learn these things, and have to be licensed by the state. If a pharmacist makes a mistake, their license is on the line. Their career, their livelihood, everything could be gone. Who's going to be held accountable for a potentially deadly mistake if a computer is running the show?

So the system is safe as long as there is someone to blame and/or sue?

 

[mgb_phys]

So, what are these inserts printed for?

Lawyers

So the system is safe as long as there is someone to blame and/or sue?

God Bless America

 

[mgb_phys]

You could add some simple technology to reduce the risk of human errors.

My grandmother takes the typical mixture of dozens of pills (well typical of anyone in their 80s with access to healthcare) these are now packed in transparent blister packs with the one 'bubble' per day containing the mix of that days pills.

A camera system that imaged each pack and from size/shape/color determined what each pill was an compared it to the prescription would be easy.
It wouldn't be perfect although makers go to a lot of effort to differentiate common pills for easy recognition there is only a limited number of combinations.
But it could tell if a pill was missing/wrong number packaged.

 

[SticksandStones]

So the system is safe as long as there is someone to blame and/or sue?

I didn't say that. However, someone being accountable has a just a little bit more reason to make sure that the person getting the prescription isn't going to die than does a computer produced by some manufacturer X.

I said it before and I'll say it again: Pharmacists have a job that requires a lot of judgement calls on an individual basis that can not be safely or efficiently replicated by a computer. Pharmacists do more than just count out pills.

A camera system that imaged each pack and from size/shape/color determined what each pill was an compared it to the prescription would be easy.

Except that the same medication from different manufacturers can look very different, and two different medications can look very similar.

But it could tell if a pill was missing/wrong number packaged.

It probably could tell if a pill was missing, but I'm not entirely convinced it would be able to tell if it had 2 of drug X and 0 of drug Y.

Otherwise, that could be a good idea. If nothing else it could assist the pharmacist and an extra layer of redundancy.

 

[BobG]

Computers can malfunction and there will always be someone required to monitor the system. Take airplanes for example. Would you trust technology alone to fly an airplaine without a pilot for you?

Computers malfunction much less frequently than humans make mistakes. Humans would be safer having a computer control the entire flight regardless of how they feel about it, or whether they trust the technology. You just as easily find people that think flying is much more dangerous than driving, for that matter. How people feel doesn't always correspond to reality.

Probably the only way a computer is 'less trustworthy' than a human is when an error does occur. The human will probably only the make the error once in a while, even if he doesn't notice that he's made an error. A computer can reproduce the same error over and over and over, turning a programming error into a disaster.

There's a reason why pharmacists can dispense medications and doctors can't. It adds an extra layer of security. You wouldn't be surprised to know how often patients go see several different doctors, and fail to inform these doctors of the medications they are taking from other doctors. However, they often go to one pharmacist. So, when the pharmacist sees your on blood pressure medication and you have a prescription for viagra, they can say something.

Actually, doctors can't dispense drugs because it's considered a conflict of interest to both prescribe the drug and profit from the sale of it. A pharmacist can't dispense drugs from a doctor's office, either. The prescription and the sale have to be kept separate.

The closest the two operations ever get to each other is in a hospital (or in some non-profit medical centers, such as military medical facilities). The pharmacy and the medical side of the hospital still have to be completely separate entities, with the pharmacy simply leasing space in the hospital.

On a side note, a few states also prohibit a doctor's office from administering medical tests, such as lab work, MRI's, etc. Statistically, the number of medical tests requested (and charged for) by a medical office skyrocket as soon as they buy a sophisticated machine, such as an MRI. Doctor's should be focused on treating their patient; not on generating profits through the sale of drugs and medical tests. (Admittedly, a counter-argument could be made that access to the tests for patients that actually need them would be decreased if the general public didn't chip in for the equipment via unnecessary tests).

 

[mgb_phys]

Except that the same medication from different manufacturers can look very different, and two different medications can look very similar.

The same drug looking different isn't a problem (assuming your computer has an OR operator)
Manufacturers make similair drugs look very different - there are a whole bunch of rules/regs on how different the name and look must be.
Most (non-hospital) pharmacists dispense a relatively limited set of drugs. Yes there might be an anti-radiation drug that looks the same as prozac but your local pharmacy is unlikely to carry it.

A system that a-priori knows ,from the prescription, that monday's pouch should contain 3 red square ones, 2 white round ones and 4 pink lozenges is very easy to do.

 

[SticksandStones]

On a side note, a few states also prohibit a doctor's office from administering medical tests, such as lab work, MRI's, etc. Statistically, the number of medical tests requested (and charged for) by a medical office skyrocket as soon as they buy a sophisticated machine, such as an MRI. Doctor's should be focused on treating their patient; not on generating profits through the sale of drugs and medical tests. (Admittedly, a counter-argument could be made that access to the tests for patients that actually need them would be decreased if the general public didn't chip in for the equipment via unnecessary tests).

The argument I hear from doctors is that NOT doing the test and finding out later that the test would have saved the patient's life is a million dollar lawsuit waiting to happen.

Actually, doctors can't dispense drugs because it's considered a conflict of interest to both prescribe the drug and profit from the sale of it. A pharmacist can't dispense drugs from a doctor's office, either. The prescription and the sale have to be kept separate.

Good to know, thanks for correcting me!

 

[BobG]

The argument I hear from doctors is that NOT doing the test and finding out later that the test would have saved the patient's life is a million dollar lawsuit waiting to happen.

They're doctors. Their lobby groups are much more honest than lawyers' lobby groups!

 

[mikapple]

You could add some simple technology to reduce the risk of human errors.

My grandmother takes the typical mixture of dozens of pills (well typical of anyone in their 80s with access to healthcare) these are now packed in transparent blister packs with the one 'bubble' per day containing the mix of that days pills.

A camera system that imaged each pack and from size/shape/color determined what each pill was an compared it to the prescription would be easy.

I like that blister packs idea, I was doing that when I was in the hospital, less miscount. But I guess when you are an out patient, and as someone said, one person may visit a few doctors and they might visit them one on Tuesday, one on Friday, that's kind of confusing for these elderly, my grandpa constantly stares at his medication and doesn't know what to take... I saw a lot of pharmacists were trying to help, but the elderly can't even remember when s/he saw who... I wonder if doctors can live peacefully with a centralized system. (the USB with all their medical information, as an option thing for these seniors.)

And the camera idea is actually being used even at the small pharmacy I worked at. But it's not the real size picture, just a picture to show the markings which is hardly to be seen on a small pill...

 

[Negatron]

The same drug looking different isn't a problem (assuming your computer has an OR operator)

Or a few NAND or NOR operators :)

A computer could certainly do their job and do it much better. The problem is they can't do it yet, even though there is that possibility.