March 29th, 2010 by KevinMD in Better Health Network, Health Policy, News, Opinion
Tags: American Medical News, General Medicine, Google Health, Microsoft HealthVault, Personal Health Data, Personal Health Record, PHR, Primary Care, revolution health
2 Comments »
A personal health record (PHR) has been touted as a way for patients to better keep track of their health information. Google Health and Microsoft HealthVault lead the way. But what happens if the company storing your data gets bought, goes bankrupt, or simply decides to discontinue their system?
Well, those who stored their data with Revolution Health are finding out first hand. The troubled company, which started off with so much fanfare yet died in a whimper, recently announced they’re shutting down their personal health record service. According to American Medical News: “Industry insiders say Revolution joins a long list of vendors who launched PHRs with a big splash, only to find little interest from consumers.”
Most of my patients don’t use a personal health record, and prefer that I enter the data in myself, or export it from from my electronic record system. The problem is: a) there isn’t enough time in a 15-minute patient visit to help patients enter in their data (apart from what I already do in my own system), and b) many online personal health record sites aren’t compatible with the systems doctors are using.
Leaving the data entry to the patient is inefficient, and a sure way to minimize the adoption rate. Indeed, “the most successful PHR-type systems have been created by healthcare organizations and have benefits to patients, such as e-mailing with physicians, online appointment scheduling and the ability to look at information entered by their physicians.”
That means a successful personal health records have to be well-integrated with or designed by existing hospital and physician systems, making it harder for a third-party system, such as the defunct Revolution Health service, to gain traction.
*This blog post was originally published at KevinMD.com*
March 29th, 2010 by DrWes in Better Health Network, Health Policy, Opinion, Quackery Exposed, True Stories
Tags: Business, Citizens Medical Center, Conspiracy, Doctor-Patient Interest, General Medicine, Hospitals, Mandated Care, Patient Care, Primary Care, Racketeering Charges
No Comments »
When hospitals mandate where patients are treated, it can lead to conspiracy and racketeering charges. Here’s an excerpt from a letter from the Chairman of the Board of Citizens Medical Center to one of the cardiologists filing suit:
“While it is certainly your right to exercise your medical judgement as you see fit, likewise, it is the responsibility of the Board of Directors at Citizens Medical Center to exercise their judgement as to what is in the interest of the business of Citizens Medical Center and its patients and Medical Staff. It is the Board’s firm belief that it is in the best interest of Citizens Medical Center for patients who are capable of being treated at Citizens Medical Center to be treated at Citizens Medical Center and not be transferred elsewhere.”
Business interests before doctor-patient interests? Ouch.
-WesMusings of a cardiologist and cardiac electrophysiologist.
*This blog post was originally published at Dr. Wes*
March 29th, 2010 by BobDoherty in Better Health Network, Health Policy, News, Opinion
Tags: ACP, American College Of Physicians, FactCheck.com, General Medicine, Healthcare Legislation, Healthcare Policy, Healthcare reform, Kaiser Family Foundation, Politifact.com, Primary Care, Washington Post
No Comments »
With the vote on the healthcare reform legislation behind us, it’s nice to believe that we can now move to the stage where people begin looking at what the legislation will and will not do — not based on speculation or the political rhetoric, but what is actually in the legislation itself.
I realize that this is unlikely, since we all tend to engage in cognitive dissonance when confronted with information that does not square with our own pre-conceived notions, political leanings, and philosophical bent. I know I do it (as much as I try not to) and I’m sure this is true of just about all of us. Still, there are trusted and highly-credible sources of information that I hope will be of value to anyone who is open to learning more about the new healthcare legislation and its potential impact. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at The ACP Advocate Blog by Bob Doherty*
March 29th, 2010 by Toni Brayer, M.D. in Better Health Network, Health Policy, News, Opinion
Tags: General Medicine, Health Insurance, Healthcare Policy, Healthcare reform, Primary Care
No Comments »
It’s history — healthcare reform has finally passed. Yes, it’s a watered-down bill that leaves much to be desired, but it’s a start. After months of stops, starts, rhetoric, fear mongering, empty promises and long, heated debate, many Americans aren’t sure of what just passed. It will have different effects on different people and many of the provisions are delayed until 2014. Here are a few features of the new bill:
– Insurers will be prohibited right away from excluding children with pre-existing health conditions. Adults will have to wait until 2014 to be assured of coverage.
– Health plans will have to provide immunizations and other preventive health services for children and adolescents.
– Insurers cannot charge higher insurance premiums for woman and maternity care is covered.
– Most U.S. citizens and legal residents must purchase “minimal essential coverage” for themselves and their dependents, either through the employer or exchanges that will sell policies to individuals. By 2014 you will pay a tax penalty if you ignore this mandate. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at EverythingHealth*
March 29th, 2010 by Shadowfax in Better Health Network, Health Policy, News, Opinion
Tags: ACEP, American College of Emergency Physicians, Emergency Medicine, Emergency Room Patients, ER Doctors, Healthcare Policy, Healthcare reform
1 Comment »
Last year when I interviewed then-American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) President Nick Jouriles I was disappointed that the ACEP had not staked out a clear position on healthcare reform. However, it wasn’t terrible that they didn’t have a position at that time, because the House bill was still being finished up and the Senate was still mired deeply in the fruitless “Gang of Six” negotiations. If ACEP wasn’t going to endorse reforms sight unseen, that was pretty reasonable, I thought. President Jouriles suggested that, in time, ACEP would weigh in with a position, one way or the other.
But we never heard ACEP take a position in the intervening months. So when I saw this post appear over at The Central Line, linking to this letter on the ACEP web site from ACEP’s current president, Angela Gardner, I was not surprised to see that ACEP has taken the weasel’s path and abstained from taking a position on the more or less final healthcare reform package. It’s pathetic, and brings into question whether ACEP can fulfill one of its most crucial functions: advocating for emergency room patients and advocating for emergency medicine physicians. The excuses offered by Dr Gardner for ACEP’s reticence to take a stand are fairly lame. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Movin' Meat*
