5 Responses

1. 

   Matthew Holt

   February 10th, 2008 at 2:20 pm

   1

   The problem is Ted not that your headline is too narrow, (it is but that’s OK). The problem is that RWJs headline should be “no American is prevented by money or suffers financially from accessing needed care”.

   REJ’s problem is PRECISELY that it is “informing policy (as opposed to lobbying,”. No one in Congress or Administrations of any stripe gives a cuss about that, they care about lobbying dollars spent. With minimal resources comparatively corporations and right-wing lobbies have displaced RWJ in influencing the health care debate where it actually matters–in laws passed and policies enacted.

2. 

   Ted Eytan

   February 10th, 2008 at 2:51 pm

   2

   Hi Matthew,

   Thanks for your comment. I think patient access is a great way to frame things like PHRs to leaders supporting HIT.

   I would ask you then, what would your headline read?

   Thanks for following along,

   Ted

3. 

   Ted Eytan

   February 10th, 2008 at 6:09 pm

   3

   On the topic of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, I found the following article that is informative on the points you raised, Matthew.

   I don’t represent or work for RWJF. I can say though, that a lot of the innovation that I have catalyzed in my career so far has been impacted by RWJF support for my training and several other of their funded programs. That’s been my experience.

   See “In Pursuit of Social Change: A Conversation With Risa Lavizzo-Mourey”

   There is certainly a conversation to be had about the role of policy makers along with the other actors in health information technology in supporting patient access. As we begin posting our personas work, I welcome your ideas on that.

4. 

   Matthew Holt

   February 11th, 2008 at 1:05 pm

   4

   Ted–all that work (from RWJ) is totally valuable HOWEVER my headline is the easy part that every other country has figured out — “no American is either prevented by lack of money or suffers financially from accessing needed care”.

   All the other stuff (IT, evidenced based care, innovations in care delivery, etc etc etc)is an ongoing process that everyone needs to make better. Too many people in the US worry about the latter stuff without fixing the first piece–which is EASY to fix. The reason it hasnt been fixed is because of the lack of political influence from the parties that want to fix it (the working poor). Their “representatives” are RWJ and the like, but they havent chosen to go after the problem politically.

   The enemies of fair universal coverage which would create my headline–who are basically the same people as HRCs vast right wing consipiracy–have been incredibly effective in spending much much less money but directly influencing the policies of Republican and moderate Democratic pols. Every op ed from Manhattan, AEI or Cato (and there are lots) is a drip drip drip effect on the conversation.

   I think RWJ should take most of its money and go that direction. I realize they dont agree, and so they continue to fund the same studies on how to make insurance affordable for three pygmies living in Alaska that takes 5 years and then gets published in a journal no one reads — instead of funding a lobbying machine to pay off Congress to get the right thing done.

5. 

   Ted Eytan

   February 12th, 2008 at 7:10 am

   5

   Matthew,

   Helpful. Knowing everyone’s headline makes for better collaboration.

   I can see the perspective that some people are backing in to this headline. Others have gone into integrated systems where the problems do not exist (as much, we still have to interact with the fragmented care world). For me, this initiative was all about leaving the integrated system temporarily to understand the problems better.

   On the issue of the rest of the world - I have been surprised in conversations with medical leaders and the literature from single payer systems that there are still hurdles to patient-centered care provision. See:

   Cathy Schoen et al., “Primary Care And Health System Performance: Adults’ Experiences In Five Countries,” Health Aff (October 28, 2004): hlthaff.w4.487

   I think there’s the financing system headline, and there’s the medical profession headline. There are lots of headlines to write, right?

   Great discussion and we are open to more headlines!

   Ted