...Jacqueline Carothers HSM 330/Health Services Info Systems Professor Natasha Celestin Table of Contents………………………………………………… I. Introduction of NueMD EMR……………………………………………… A. Practice Management………………………………………………... 1. Patient Registration…………………………………………….... 2. Reimbursement Management II. Uses of NueMD EMR Software…………………………………………….. A. Advantages of using NuMD EMR…………………………………… B. Disadvantages of the product…………………………………………. III. Governance, Privacy, and Legal Issues…………………………………….. A. Privacy compliance – HIPAA………………………………………… 1. Liability…………………………………………………………….. 2. Legal Interoperability ……………………………………………... 3. HIPAA Audits……………………………………………………… IV. Benefits of using NueMd EMR software versus the previous software …... A. Inpatients EMR………………………………………………………… B. Patient Accounting and Patient Management…………………………... 1. NueMd Case Studies……………………………………………….. 2. Partnerships and Affiliations……………………………………….. V. Summary VI. References NueSoft technologies, Inc. is a provider of web based medical and practice management software. Nue soft also known as NueMD medical software. Nuesoft technology headquarter and was established in 1993 in Marietta Georgia by Massoudd Alibaksh. The company develops and sells practice management software for physicians, practices, medical billing companies, Nusoft also known as NueMD that is a flagship product which...
Words: 1696 - Pages: 7
...LEB Exam 2 Review Cases: * In re Sept. 11 Litigation (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (Class action lawsuit) – Negligence – Duty of Care * Families of people who died in the attack sued American Airlines and Aviation security companies who were responsible for on-the-ground security in the Boston airport on 9/11 * Argued that they were carless in screening passengers * D’s defense: no duty to the victims in New York because this type of event has never happened in the past * Verdict: Not dismissed * When a plane is hijacked, it is reasonably foreseeable that the plane may crash, making passengers AND OTHERS AT THE CRASH SITE reasonably foreseeable victims * Not overly burdensome (Factor 6) to impose duty because D is in the business of moving people SAFELY from place to place * Otis Engineering Co. vs. Clark (Tex. 1983) – Negligence Duty of Care * Two women killed by drunk driver (he worked for Otis and was sent home because he was drunk at work) * Is there a duty to control the conduct of another? * General rule: No (usually when employees are not following through with company practices, company not held responsible) * Exception: Employer’s exercise of control over INCAPICTATED employee = employer must do what reasonably careful employer would do under similar circumstances * Duty of reasonable care generally does not include a duty to control the activities of others to prevent the employee...
Words: 4484 - Pages: 18