Posts Tagged ‘Untitled’

“You shouldn’t have to know how many bars of signal there are, you turn on the phone and there’s a dial tone.”

July 14th, 2009 | Popularity: 4%
0 comments | Leave a reply

This is what Marty Cooper, father of the mobile phone, told me as he handed me a jitterbug phone. I opened up the clamshell, and sure enough, there was a dial tone.

So who decided that all of us need to assess the strength of the cell phone signal, dial a person’s number, and then find out whether there will be a connection or not? Lots of analogies to health care.

I got to meet Marty and Arlene Harris, the CEO and Co-Founder of Jitterbug, yesterday, as we toured them through The Sidney Garfield Health Care Innovation Center, in Oakland, CA. This is probably my fourth time at the Center – I have grown to enjoy the inspiration that goes beyond what is housed inside, because it is a great environment to be in, just to think about what’s possible.

I met Arlene about a month ago when she spoke at the mHealthInitiative June Seminar, in Washington, DC, and learned more about Arlene and Marty’s experience yesterday, in the company of experts from Kaiser Permanente, including leaders of its Internet Services Group, and physician leaders, including John Mattison, MD, from the Kaiser Permanente Southern California Informatics group.

They originally set out to create a mobile phone service for people who would not likely use much airtime, and would also not expect to pay a lot per month, around $10, maybe. When they couldn’t find a carrier that would provide this service, they created their own. Both Arlene and Marty have long roots in telecommunications. Arlene told us that the first mobile health application they developed provided pagers to families who were waiting for organs on transplant lists. The pagers freed them from sitting by their home phones, waiting for a call to arrive.

During our tour we saw the most high-tech innovations, including mobile computing devices that hospital staff can use to read barcodes on medications, take photos of wounds, and document in the electronic medical record. We also saw practical innovations, including a discharge board that visibly shows patients and families which milestones have been reached on their way home.

I’ll say for all of us, the day was a reminder that everyone is necessary – from those who create the breakthrough idea, to those who provide service to people who want and need it. As I have said on this blog before, I am interested in mHealth and believe leading edge health care organizations have the ability to leverage it to deliver care affordably as well as equitably, to the large proportion of our population that is now far more mobile than a web browser on a desktop.

With great thanks to Marty and Arlene for spending time to inspire our innovators about the promise of mobility, and of course to The Sidney Garfield Health Care Innovation Center for the mind expanding environment.

Meaningful Meaningful Use

June 26th, 2009 | Popularity: 7%
7 comments

A little while ago, I wrote about the experience of a patient, Fred Holliday, whose wife Regina Holliday stimulated a discussion about patient access to recorded health information. Fred Holliday died on June 17, 2009 .

On June 16, 2009, the HIT Policy Committee produced its first recommendations of what Meaningful Use should be. I of course am looking at the proposal from the perspective of patient and family involvement in care, and I think in many ways it is impressive.

It’s useful to think about the HIT Policy Committee recommendation in the context of what the law as written says, which is as follows (page 355-356):

‘(2) MEANINGFUL EHR USER.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of paragraph (1), an eligible professional shall be treated as a meaningful EHR user for an EHR reporting period for a payment year (or, for purposes of subsection (a)(7), for an EHR reporting period under such subsection for a year) if each of the following requirements is met: ‘‘(i) MEANINGFUL USE OF CERTIFIED EHR TECHNOLOGY.—The eligible professional demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary, in accordance with subparagraph (C)(i), that during such period the profes- sional is using certified EHR technology in a meaning- ful manner, which shall include the use of electronic prescribing as determined to be appropriate by the Secretary. ‘‘(ii) INFORMATIONEXCHANGE.—The eligible profes- sional demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary, in accordance with subparagraph (C)(i), that during such period such certified EHR technology is connected in a manner that provides, in accordance with law and standards applicable to the exchange of information, for the electronic exchange of health information to improve the quality of health care, such as pro- moting care coordination. ‘‘(iii) REPORTING ON MEASURES USINGE HR.—Subject to subparagraph (B)(ii) and using such certified EHR technology, the eligible professional submits information for such period, in a form and manner specified by the Secretary, on such clinical quality measures and such other measures as selected by the Secretary under subparagraph (B)(i).

That’s the complete definition in the law.

With that in mind, the thinking of the HIT Policy Committee is inclusive of a policy priority they call “Engage patients and families,” with a fairly reasonable (based on what I know the technology can do) set of objectives and measures for 2011-2015. The way I interpret the thinking in this set, it is that in 2011, patients will begin to read their records online, in 2013 they will begin to write their records online, including via secure messaging with their providers, and in 2015, there will be full real-time access to a personal health record populated with their data.

The measures in 2011 include the use of an after visit summary, which I’ve written about previously, and is relatively easy to measure (and produce, in my opinion).

I think the measures are a nice compromise between what leading edge health care systems can do today versus where all health care systems should be in the future. I’ll also say that this component of meaningful use is likely to help all of the other components be more successful, because they will cause health care systems and providers to see the impact of what they do, through patient reaction. To the patients out there, what do you think?

“What on earth is the rationale there?” : Prohibition on sharing test results with patients online in California

January 21st, 2009 | Popularity: 37%
8 comments

The question asked in the title of this post is one I have as well, so I’ve decided to ask it in this post.

It was posed by e-Patient Dave in a comment on this post illustrating the challenge of test result sharing with patients today.

He’s referring to California Health and Safety Code Section 123148 , which makes it illegal to share certain kinds of test results with patients online. It also says:

In the event that a health care professional arranges for the provision of test results by Internet posting or other electronic manner, the results shall be delivered to a patient in a reasonable time period, but only after the results have been reviewed by the health care professional.

Knowing what we know about health care, reasonable time period and “only after the results have been reviewed” may be in conflict.

I understand this law was passed in 2002, so in 2009, I’d like to ask patients and those who care for them what they know of the rationale here? If you do not live in California, is there any such legislation in your state? If this law no longer existed, can people envision what the harms (and benefits) would be?

Stepping Through a Patient’s Experience with Hypertension: Adjusting Therapy

August 8th, 2008 | Popularity: 25%
0 comments | Leave a reply

This is third of a multi-part series on a patient’s experience managing a chronic condition, in this case hypertension. A diagnosis has been made, and our patient is following up to see if the therapy is working or if adjustments need to be made.

Click on the image to see it larger size

adjust-htn-eytan

Patient Story (Frydman)

I was supposed to go back but I didn’t do it. During a business trip I did try checking my BP with a home tool a few times and every time the BP was well within the norms, helping me be even more in denial. But then the next time I went to my friend’s office the data still showed clear HBP. Go figure!

(On the use of home monitors)It was first a few times on a specific day. Then a couple of times the next day. I then thought I would buy an OMRON blood pressure monitor. But I conveniently forgot about it when I returned to my home. No he (my doctor) didn’t say a thing about it. His behavior made me believe that he was not supportive of the home monitoring.

Clinical and Public Health pearls (Houston-Miller)

  • Many patients already self-monitor (55 %, do it, 64 % own a monitor) – many have not been trained how to monitor correctly, and may over monitor; the most accurate way to monitor is twice per day, once in the morning, once in the evening, for 7 days. Patients should not monitor during the day and should not monitor while at work. These measures have not been shown to correlate with future organ damage as well as the morning and evening measures.
  • The estimates of “masked hypertension,” or high blood pressure that appears normal in the doctor’s office are probably much greater than the 10 % reported; many patients restart medications in advance of coming to see their physicians (“similar to flossing your teeth a week before the dentist appointment”).

Comment

Where is the data? As in previous encounters, the data is again localized away from the patient and with the provider and ancillary services. Patients are asked to come back (physically) to the physician office to have their blood pressure rechecked and evaluated. The result is that the patient must ask for their blood pressure data from their provider, not the other way around.

What’s missing? If patients do not return in person (where their provider can bill for an office visit), there is no workflow in place in the majority of healthcare to assess blood pressure control, so these patients often go undertreated or untreated. Although 47 % of physicians recommend home-monitoring, many do not know recommendations for appropriate monitoring, including calibration of monitors, monitoring technique, and counseling on the value of home monitoring.

There is also a missed opportunity to leverage social networking, for connections to patients who may have recently been diagnoses and are integrating monitoring and treatment into their daily lives, similar to what occurs at the PatientsLIkeMe Community. Current data shows that there is a significant risk of being untreated or undertreated (4 – 11 times) among patients who have not seen a doctor in the past year. It’s as possible that these data are confounded by the fact that for most patients, management of the condition is stipulated by the care system to be an office-based activity.

Next post, a slight switching of gears to the annual health plan/employer interaction. Comments welcomed, of course

Photo Friday: Oakland Bay Bridge

May 9th, 2008 | Popularity: 12%
0 comments | Leave a reply

This photograph was taken from the headquarters of the Pacific Business Group on Health, when we were meeting with David Lansky, Ph.D. the President and CEO, and Ted von Glahn, MS, to talk about consumer engagement in health care. The second photograph is the wall of fame of PBGH membership and associate membership.

David has been a great proponent of patient and family involvement ever since I have known him and is bringing this approach to his work at PBGH, and both gentlemen have a lot of experience interacting with employers interested in an improved health care system. David contributed a very useful perspective in this California Healthcare Foundation Report on the Future of Personal Health Records last year.

San Francisco

Wall of Fame - PBGH