THCB

Categories

Category: Uncategorized

NYeC Launches Patient Portal for New Yorkers Design Challenge

• 1

By Matthew Holt and Paul Wilder, NYeC

NYeC logoImagine New Yorkers: you have access to your healthcare records when and where you need them. As easy as logging onto your banking website. You can print out a list of your current medications, see when the last time you had a test or immunization was, see recent test and lab results, and manage your consent for which doctors and specialists you want to be able to see your records too. Safely. Securely. YOUR health information when YOU need it.

This is what the New York eHealth Collaborative (NYeC) is planning for the future of New York and why today, in partnership with Health 2.0, we’ve launched the Patient Portal for New Yorkers Design Challenge.

The deadline for challenge submissions is April 11th.

This is the first step in beginning to design what this portal— essentially a website for patients to access their medical records online—will look like. The Patient Portal for New Yorkers Design Challenge has $25,000 in prizes. We are calling all designers and developers to submit prototypes for the portal. The top portal interface designs will be chosen, publicized, and voted upon by New Yorkers after the April 11th deadline. The winner will be announced early this summer.

Designers and Developers: we want you to innovate and put on your most creative caps for this exciting challenge. New Yorkers need to be able to see their information in a way that’s easy to use and meaningful to them. This is a chance to make a big difference in the healthcare of 20 million New York residents.

Continue reading…

Doctor Code: Learning EMR Language

• 20

By Rob Lamberts, MD

OK, I’ll admit it: I had no idea.  I thought that the whining and griping by other doctors about EMR was just petulance by a group of people who like to be in charge and who resist change.  I thought that they were struggling because of their lack of insight into the real benefits of digital records, instead focusing on their insignificant immediate needs.  I thought they were a bunch of dopes.

Yep.  I am a jerk.

My transition to a new practice gave me the opportunity to dump my old EMR (with all the deficiencies I’ve come to hate) and get a new, more current system.*  I figured that someone like me would be able to learn and master a new EMR with ease.  After all, I do understand about data schema, structured and unstructured data, I know about MEDCIN, SNOMED, and HL-7 interfaces.  Gosh darn it, I am a card-carrying member of the EMR elite!  A new product should be a piece of cake!   I’ll put my credentials at the bottom of this post, in case you are interested.**

So, imagine my shock when I was confused and befuddled as I attempted to learn this new product.  How could someone who could claim a bunch of product enhancements as my personal suggestions have any problem with a different system?  The insight into the answer to this sheds light onto one of the basic problems with EMR systems.

Problem 1: Different Languages

As I struggled to figure out my new system, it occurred to me that I felt a lot like a person learning a new language.  Here I was: an expert in German linguistics and I was now having to learn Japanese.  Both are systems of written and spoken code that accomplish the same task: communication of data from one person to another.  Both do so using many of the same basic elements: subjects, objects, nouns, verbs.  Both are learned by children and spoken by millions of people.  But both are very, very different in many ways.

Continue reading…

New on Bookshelves: Innovation with Information Technologies in Healthcare

• 3

By Matthew Holt

Lyle Berkowitz, MD, associate chief medical officer of innovation for Northwestern Memorial Hospital, and Chris McCarthy, MBA, an innovation specialist with Kaiser Permanente’s Innovation Consultancy, have just released a compilation of stories about various organizations’ HIT projects. The two coeditors of Innovation with Information Technologies in Healthcare talk about what they learned after gathering these examples from across the U.S.

Accidental Tourist: Visiting the Bumrungrad Hospital in Bangkok

• 77

By Jeff Goldsmith


There’s been a lot of recent speculation that more Americans will be taking their elective medical problems overseas. In 2008, Deloitte’s Center for Health Solutions estimated that 750 thousand Americans travelled overseas for medical care in 2007, and forecast a eight-fold increase by 2010 In a 2009 update, Deloitte found that the 2008 financial crisis devastated overseas medical travel, but still forecast 1.6 million US citizens going abroad for medical care in 2012.

Among overseas medical destinations, no facility is mentioned more than Bumrungrad (last syllable rhymes with “hot”) Hospital. Bumrungrad is a privately owned but publicly traded 550 bed acute care hospital in central Bangkok. On a recent trip to Thailand, I stopped at Bumrungrad to find out what all the shouting was about and was really impressed with what I saw.

Bumrungrad’s CEO is a courtly, silver-haired Virginian named Mack Banner, who spent most of his career in the US investor-owned sector. Though the hospital was founded in 1980, it moved into its new facility in 1997, just in time for the Asian financial crisis. The facility was Joint Commission (International) certified in 2002, and one fifth of its physicians are US Board certified in their respective specialties.

In 2008, the hospital opened a beautiful 21 story Clinic building next door, housing 30 specialty clinics and most of its medical staff. Bumrungrad’s Clinic Facility is Mayo-esque, enabling patients with particular specialty problems to be worked up, evaluated and cared for on a single floor. The hospital subsequently renovated its inpatient rooms, which resemble those of the Asian-themed Washington DC Park Hyatt in elegance. The hospital is a sunny, happy place, with apparent high morale and very high service standards. English is spoken widely throughout the hospital.

Continue reading…

A Tale of Two Studies: What Are the Actual Costs of an EHR?

• 30

By Edmund Billings, MD

Does anyone in their right mind believe that these are the best of times in healthcare or health IT?

Scratch that.

Does anyone besides Judy Faulkner and Neal Patterson believe these are the best of times? (I mean, everyone knows that Dramatic Transition + Industry-wide Upheaval + Piles of Cash = Satisfaction / Contentment, proving the point mathematically.)

The question: At what cost to overall healthcare improvement do Epic and Cerner (and others, to be fair … except you, Allscripts) reap massive profits?

The short answer: We don’t really know.

While it is generally acknowledged by most (certainly not all, which you know if you’ve spent any time on HIStalk) that the ready availability and automated cross-checking of electronic health records improves care, there is no definitive study showing dramatic clinical improvement, demonstrable return on investment, etc.

Indeed, we now have a number of studies suggesting exactly the opposite:

Continue reading…

Five Lessons in Transparency from Cleveland Clinic CEO Toby Cosgrove

• 7

By David Whelan

Cleveland Clinic is the health care industry trailblazer when it comes to publishing its clinical outcomes. As discussed in this earlier story (“How To Report Quality To The Public”), the Ohio hospital system annually publishes Outcomes Books that detail the clinical performance of each of its departments.

If you doubt this is radical, go to your local hospital’s Web site. See if it publishes how many patients died during heart surgery last year.

At Cleveland Clinic that number is easy to find. The hospital performed 459 bypass surgeries and only three patients died in the hospital. That is about a third the rate of deaths recorded at other hospitals for the same procedure.

Yet Cleveland Clinic does not only publish data that casts itself in a favorable light. In the third quarter of last year, 3% of bypass patients had strokes after their operations, when that number should have been around 1%.

I called the hospital’s corporate office to find out more about the history of the Outcomes books, how they affect hospital operations, and if there were lessons to share. I asked to speak to the de facto “Chief Transparency Office” and assumed I’d be directed to a middle manager working in the office of public affairs or marketing.

Instead, I soon found myself on the phone with the CEO. It turns out that Delos “Toby” Cosgrove, who runs the $6 billion health system, is also the organization’s unofficial transparency officer. He was the guy who developed the Outcomes Book concept in the first place.

Continue reading…

The Independent Payment Advisory Board: Why It Is So Difficult to Kill the Death Panel Myth

• 5

By Peter Ubel, MD

In August of 2009, Sarah Palin claimed that the health legislation being crafted by Democrats at the time would create a “death panel,” in which government bureaucrats would decide whether disabled and elderly patients are “worthy of healthcare.”  Despite being debunked by fact-checkers and mainstream media outlets, this myth has persisted, with almost half of Americans stating recently that they believe the Affordable Care Act (ACA) creates such a panel.

The death panel myth killed neither the ACA nor Obama’s reelection bid.  But persistence of this myth could threaten the Obama administration’s efforts to implement the law, because many of its most controversial features are scheduled to be implemented over the next few years. Why is the death panel myth so hard to shake and why is its persistence relevant to the unfolding of Obamacare?

In part, the myth is hard to shake because most people have a very poor understanding of the complex law.  The ACA tries to increase access to health insurance through a bewildering combination of Medicaid expansions, private insurance subsidies, health insurance exchanges, and the infamous health insurance mandate.  It attempts to improve healthcare quality through things such as reimbursement reforms and promotion of electronic medical records.  And it encourages the formation of more efficient healthcare organizations, with inscrutable names like “accountable care organizations” and “medical homes”.

The myth is also likely to persist because the law calls for the establishment of a 15 person committee– the independent payment advisory board (or IPAB)–which is given the job of recommending cost-saving measures to the Secretary of Health and Human Services if Medicare expenses rise too quickly.  The IPAB will consist of independent healthcare experts who are forbidden, by law, from proposing changes that will affect Medicare coverage or quality.

Continue reading…

Progress

• 4

By Rob Lamberts, MD


Finally.

I can finally see progress in what I am doing.  Above is a photo of the front page of my new practice website (visit http://doctorlamberts.org).

There still is a little “Lorem ipsum” here and there – like having labels you missed on a shirt you are wearing – but I am very happy with the look.  The pictures of the sepia photos with the iPad making it color were the genius of my web developer (with some suggestions from me), giving a perfect image of the use of technology to accomplish “old-fashioned care made new.”

I’ve spent good portion of the past few days writing the content (replacing most of the “Lorem ipsum”).  Of what I’ve written, the strongest was in the section “Why It’s Different,” where I compare life in a traditional practice to what I intend to do.  Here are a few examples:

“I Need an Appointment”

Traditional Practice

· Call the office, hear a message about calling 911, get placed on hold or leave voice message (after navigating automated attendant).
· Get called back to find out the reason for your appointment.
· Appointment is made around what is open for the doctor.
· Take time away from your schedule to meet doctor’s schedule.

Our Practice:

· Log on to portal and directly make your own appointment to fit your schedule.
Or
· Call the office and tell a human being that you need an appointment.

Continue reading…

Beyond the Fiscal Cliff? The Sea of Uncertainty …

• 12

By ROBERT LASZEWSKI

Last week’s deal to avert the “fiscal cliff” settled very little.

For those in the health care market, I will suggest the big takeaway is that we should expect very little will be settled in the coming months and we will continue to face a great deal of uncertainty for years to come.

Without an agreement to alter the course we are on, it is estimated that we will add more than $10 trillion to the national debt over the next ten years. Most experts agree that we need to reduce that amount by about half in order to put our nation’s fiscal course on a sustainable track. The Simpson-Bowles Debt Commission, for example, called for $4 trillion in deficit reduction––a fourth in new revenue and three-fourths in spending cuts.

We’ve heard lots of talk about a “Grand Bargain” between Republicans and Democrats to finally put our fiscal house in order. To be a grand bargain the two sides would have to agree to a deal that at least equaled the $4 trillion Simpson-Bowles proposal in its scope.

But Republicans and Democrats never came close to that kind of solution in the run-up to the recent fiscal cliff deal.

In the end, the two sides agreed to about $600 billion in tax increases. They also spent hundreds of billions more by agreeing to put off the sequester cuts for just two months, fix the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) problem, extend some business tax benefits, and extend unemployment benefits. They separately found $30 billion in Medicare savings, mostly from hospitals, to grant the Medicare doctors only a one-year delay in their 27% fee cuts.

Now, Obama says he wants $600 billion in more revenue by limiting tax breaks.

Continue reading…

The Breast Density Bill: A (Very) Dense Dilemma …

• 9

By ANUBHAV KAUL,  MD and JENNIFER BROKAW, MD

The passage of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) and the reelection of President Obama was cause for real hope among those in pursuit of the Holy Grail in medicine: higher quality at lower cost. However, with the passage of what is called the Breast Density Bill in several states, the quality cost equation seems doomed on both ends.  The Affordable Care Act mandates coverage of screening mammograms, without co-pay or deductible, but the Breast Density Bill is destined to push utilization of “non-beneficial” imaging, ie imaging that does not clearly save lives, even further.

The new law, authored by Sen. Joe Simitian, was signed into law this past October in California.  Beginning April of next year, the bill requires facilities that perform mammograms to include a special notice, within the imaging report sent to patients, regarding the high density of breast tissue and the benefit of additional screening tests.   The notice will state the following; “Because your mammogram demonstrates that you have dense breast tissue, which could hide small abnormalities, you might benefit from supplementary screening tests, depending on your individual risk factors”.

The supporters of the bill make the ethical argument that women have the right to know about how dense breast tissue can obscure mammogram visualization, and should be offered additional test such as ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to alleviate the doubt.  To provide further support, the SOMO INSIGHT Breast Cancer Screening Study is a nationwide research effort to evaluate if automated breast ultrasound done together with routine screening mammogram is more accurate in detecting breast cancer in women with dense breast tissue.  The study is funded by U-Systems, Inc.; the Silicon Valley based company responsible for the sophisticated and expensive ultrasound technology used in this study.  Thus, one cannot deny the possibility of patient interest being confounded by financial interest.

The patient advocacy movement around breast cancer has been championed by several well-known non-profits, such as Susan B Komen, Are You Dense Inc. and even endorsement by the National Football League.  Yet, the confusion about screening is reflected in the variability of requirements for insurance coverage between states. For example, while Texas and Mississippi require screening mammograms to be covered for all women 35 and older, Utah has no coverage requirement and several other states do not require coverage until age 40.1 Awareness of breast cancer screening is necessary, and the complexities of picking up certain irregularities certainly deserve attention. However, the patient’s “right to know” should also include the right to know about “over-diagnosis”.
Continue reading…

assetto corsa mods