Showing posts with label PHR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PHR. Show all posts

Sunday, January 31, 2010

New PHR technology too much for my parent's generation? I don't think so!

0 responses
I was reading and responding to Regina Holliday's latest post, Rosa Parks in Health Care, when I read this:
The paper transfer has been used for years. The poor, the illiterate and elderly were comfortable with the current system and would not be able to understand a new electronic version. Those favoring change pointed out the favorable outcome of less wait time, faster processing and ability to aggregate data. All these argument fluttered around us, as we said goodbye to the paper version of the National Capital Metrobus transfer and hello to the Metro Smartrip Card.
It occurred to me that my parent's generation have adapted to a lot of technology over the years.  My parents were born in 1937. I decided to see if I could list just some of the things they have adopted and adapted to during their lives since then:

  1. electricity and all that came with it
  2. light bulbs
  3. ball point pen
  4. ViewMaster
  5. fiberglass
  6. electric tools
  7. vacuum cleaner
  8. indoor plumbing
  9. indoor toilets
  10. home cameras
  11. polaroid camera
  12. modern refrigerator (they used the spring house until then)
  13. electric washer and dryer (I remember my mother using a wringer washer and hanging clothes on the line)
  14. widespread use of the telephone
  15. jukebox
  16. record player
  17. electric skillets, mixers, and more
  18. television
  19. communications satellites
  20. color television
  21. 8-track players
  22. cassette player
  23. DNA sequencing/typing
  24. video cameras
  25. walkman
  26. use of x-ray and CD imaging
  27. Magnetic resonance imaging
  28. credit cards
  29. air travel
  30. crockpots
  31. electric (home) hair dryers, curling irons, etc.
  32. bar codes
  33. calculators
  34. scientific calculators
  35. batteries
  36. rechargeable batteries
  37. solar powered chargers and calculators (and more)
  38. digital thermometers
  39. super glue
  40. post-it notes
  41. velcro
  42. integrated circuits
  43. turbo-charged engines
  44. jet engines
  45. riding mowers
  46. leaf blowers
  47. edge trimmers and weed eaters
  48. pacemakers
  49. typewriter
  50. electric typewriter
  51. remote controls
  52. word processors
  53. electric dishwashers
  54. home air conditioning (window units and central air)
  55. video games
  56. disposable camera
  57. medical imaging of all sorts
  58. computer
  59. microchips
  60. VCR (and even the BETA players)
  61. camcorders
  62. cable tv
  63. satellite tv
  64. PDA's
  65. CD's and CD players
  66. digital cameras
  67. self-cleaning ovens
  68. icemakers
  69. microwave oven
  70. ATMs and ATM cards
  71. DVDs and DVD players
  72. mp3 players
  73. cell phones
  74. smart phones
  75. Wii (I can't forget that!)

And that's just to start.  For all that is listed above, we could all add a lot more, I'm sure.  What I'm trying to say is my parents' generation CAN adapt to PHRs/EMRs if they wish, especially if the technology is developed to work with the cell phone users*. They've adapted to and adopted a whole lot more than we have.   My parents can even tether a phone to their laptop while traveling in their RV.  They know where/how to find the best hot spots, too. 

We must remember that in 10 years there will be a whole new, technology-savvy group moving into the 65+ demographic.   Are we prepared for that?

*According to research done by PewInternet, 83% of adults have cell phones. 

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

My health care records: My property

12 responses
....I want my health records. I believe they are mine. And I want to be able to access them electronically. Frankly, I'd like to access them, amend them (or at least notate and comment on them), and share them with those I choose.

Recently, Dr. Rob posted about how this made him feel.


I have heard a lot of talk about ownership of medical information. Bloggers like e-Patient Dave, and Robin are strong advocates for patient ownership of their information. To be truthful, I get nervous when I hear people saying they own something I have in my possession (and I’ve blogged about this). The charts in my office are mine, right? How can I create something and have it not be mine?
Dr. Rob is an advocate for EHR/PHRs* and has used an EHR for much longer than most physicians. This is exemplary for multiple reasons, including the fact this is an expensive venture and his is a small office. But when he posted about how he was trying to make it even better for his patients, he got some comments I don't think he expected. (Sorry, Rob, we e-Patients are a tough audience. We tend to talk back.)

I commented on Dr. Rob's post:

I haven’t read the other comments, yet, so I apologize if I repeat something that has already been said.

When you made your lists, did you ask any of your patients to help you make these lists? I absolutely believe you have the best interests of the patients at heart, but you still aren’t acting in the best interest of the patient if s/he is “out there” and you are “in here”. The key words are collaboration and participation.

This phrase bothers me: “We have to have a place where we can put things down and know they are for our own eyes only.” Yes, you need to make notes to yourself, and I understand that. But if it is ABOUT me, I want to know it. If it will be passed to another doctor as part of my record, I want to know it. If only you see it, then that’s ok. We all need places to put reminders. I know this is a sensitive spot...

...Patients are people. Only in medicine is information about them hidden from them. Data is meaningless unless it is organized in a useful way and presented as such. You have the power to do that. I want my data. But I also want your organization and presentation, because I pay for that. If I have to organize it, I will in order to survive. If you organize it, I want to know how and why you did it that way. It is meaningful to me. And I want to know what others are going to read about me. Good or bad, I need to know it. It might save my life.


You see, I had good reason to say that. Multiple reasons, really. And so do many other Cushing's patients. I will relate two of them here:

REASON ONE: Lab values and lab reports may say "normal" but actually aren't.

One of the tests to check for normal/abnormal circadian rhythm and diurnal variations of normal is a late-night (midnight) serum cortisol level. When I first realized I might have Cushing's, I took pertinent research to my PCP about the use of midnight serum cortisols to test for it. She agreed to order them for me IF I could find a lab willing to do it at midnight. I arranged with a local hospital lab to come in. When my PCP got the results, she told me they were normal.

They were not normal. A few months later I requested all my records from this PCP and other doctors I had seen. When I paged through my lab reports, these midnight serum results showed my levels were high, not normal! But the lab had used afternoon ranges instead of the midnight range (close to zero) and thus did not flag the results as high.

REASON TWO: Patient records sent to other practicing physicians aren't always what the patient gets when requesting her records. Nor are they always factual.

When I saw a prominent endocrinologist after I finally realized I probably had Cushing’s Disease and had it for over 20 years, we had NO participatory or collaborative communication. I was out in 15″ after waiting months to see this doctor. I asked for and got a brief record of my visit a few weeks later. Even later, when I asked for my records from my PCP covering the last few months (I do this periodically), she included everything. And that everything included a letter and summary of my visit with the aforementioned endocrinologist.

Dr. Endo had written things in that summary and letter that were less than truthful and very different from what I was sent. In fact, what actually went on in that visit and what was in that summary/letter were so inaccurate I was floored. And angry. And hurt. The speculations made by Dr. Endo were even worse. When I told my PCP of the inaccuracies, she called and confronted Dr. Endo. Nothing was changed, nothing was done, and I was too sick at the time to pursue it. I am now reconsidering. But my PCP told me to find another endo. She would support me. And I did.

You see, not only did my record show (and still shows) I was tested and examined by Dr. Endo in ways that I was not, it also says things like “patient is depressed”, “patient reads too much on the internet” and “patient needs bariatric surgery”. Dr. Endo didn’t even ask me to come back nor was I told this. I would never have known this if my PCP hadn’t given me her records. And it’s wrong. Very wrong that I would not know this. And very wrong because I have the testing and pathology to prove it was technically inaccurate and misleading. Life-threatening.

Because this endo is a very prominent one, many other doctors took this as truth. I almost did. My PCP did not. Why? She knows me. God love her, it hasn’t been easy for her, but she has hung in there. She listens when I tell the lab ranges are wrong. She lets me send her research, peer-reviewed journal articles, and more. And she shares with me, although it’s still paper copies printed out because their wonderful EHR doesn’t allow me to look in. It is not yet participatory. But she is. And by being that way, she has helped save my life. She allowed me to peek inside. And it worked for both of us. If I had not done so, I would have believed Dr. Endo and I honestly believe I would be dead now.

As Dr. Rob, many folks on Twitter, and I discussed this, he and I realized we agreed more than we disagreed. We definitely agreed in this: If any information in my medical record is shared with anyone else, I should also be allowed to see it.

There will be many reasons touted by those who say sharing patient health records is not feasible. We discussed some of those in the comments to the aforementioned post by Dr. Rob. However, the right to our health data is not something that we can say IF about. This is must be a matter of WHEN. And WHEN needs to be soon.

Already, I ask for and get my records. At least, I get what the doctors will share with me. It takes time, money, and multiple attempts because I have to get one from one place, another from another place, etc. I would love to get it all from an online source (or sources). I want to see it all.

Will it scare me if I misread or don't understand it? Not nearly as much as being told everything is “normal” and when I get copies everything is NOT “normal”.

The patients who want this information can deal with the information. I want the right to access it. I don’t want to be forced to access it. I also want the right to point out and correct these mistakes in the same EHR/EMR/PHR. I don’t want to accuse or point fingers. I just want to participate in my own care.

What scares me is being sick and not being able to access and use the information I generated through being sick. I truly don’t think I’m in the minority. Fear is not always a bad thing. It leads to action. Nor do all have to look at their records and know what is in them. Some will, some won’t. I want the right to see and to participate.

To join in the fight for the right to open access to your own medical records, go to HealthDataRights.org and endorse these rights.


A Declaration of Health Data Rights

In an era when technology allows personal health information to be
more easily stored, updated, accessed and exchanged, the following rights
should be self-evident and inalienable. We the people:

  • Have the right to our own health data
  • Have the right to know the source of each health data element
  • Have the right to take possession of a complete copy of our individual
    health data, without delay, at minimal or no cost; if data exist in
    computable form, they must be made available in that form
  • Have the right to share our health data with others as we see fit
These principles express basic human rights as well as essential elements of health care that is participatory, appropriate and in the interests of each patient.
No law or policy should abridge these rights.
If you feel strongly about this or have a story to share, feel free to comment.


*EHR-Electronic Health Record
PHR-Patient Health Record (I like Participatory for "P")





To read more:

How Much is Too Much? (Dr. Rob)
A Manifesto on Health Data Rights
Jen's Posterous
HealthDataRights.org Blogroll
The Health Care Industry vs. Health Reform
“No political power center for regular people”in health reform

Sunday, April 5, 2009

How personal are Personal Health Records (PHRs)?

3 responses
Should "P" really be "PARTICIPATORY"?

An interesting and very timely discussion about patient data is taking place on ePatients.net. In his post, Imagine someone had been managing your data, and then you looked, ePatient Dave tells about his adventure of setting up a personal health record (PHR) using Google Health, and then importing his data from his "patient portal, PatientSite". (Dave is lucky to have access to such a portal, I thought, when I was reading this. Little did I know....)

Dave was in for a shock. An eye-opening, mouth-dropping, pick-yer-teeth-up-off-the-floor shock. The information that was uploaded did not at all resemble the information he expected. He summarized it like this:

  • what they transmitted for diagnoses was actually billing codes
  • the one item of medication data they sent was correct, but it was only my current BP med. (Which, btw, Google Health said had an urgent conflict with my two-years-ago potassium condition, which had been sent without a date). It sent no medication history, not even the fact that I’d had four weeks of high dosage Interleukin-2, which just MIGHT be useful to have in my personal health record, eh?
  • the allergies data did NOT include the one thing I must not ever, ever violate....
The resulting discussion, as seen in the comments, brought out some very salient points which I hope you'll read. The one I want to touch on in the rest of this post is the need for participatory medicine. I'm talking about the patient partnering with his doctor for all aspects of health care. Included with that is the use of PHRs.

In Your Doctor's Office or the Internet? Two Paths to Personal Health Records, the authors examine the need for PHRs and the two "distinct options" they forsee emerging.
One is a stand-alone personal health record (PHR), such as the Internet-based tools for patients developed by Google, Microsoft, WebMD, health insurance plans, and others.1 Our bet, however, is that the other option, the "integrated PHR" that is an extension of physicians' electronic health records (EHRs), will go further in facilitating the type of physician–patient relationship that will improve health and health care, at a lower cost.
The free, full-text article talks about a hypothetical patient, Mary, and what the potential for an integrated PHR would mean for her. It explains how an integrated PHR is used with part of the Palo Alto Medical Foundation. They also discuss President Obama's stimulus package and his push for EMRs, adding this remark: "Among the many questions likely to arise during this transformation will be how the information in health records will reach patients."

I'd like for them to read Dave's experience. And I would like to see if what the integrated PHR the patients in Palo Alto are using is actually truely participatory. I don't think it is what I call participatory. The following quote does not say anything about allowing patients to change, add to, or delete portions of their PHR.

They can offer patients as much access to data, scheduling resources, and communication among members of the health care team as providers are willing to permit. Some physicians are wary of letting patients see laboratory results and book their own appointments, but provider groups around the country are pushing the envelope and giving patients access to information and the ability to share it with others.
The term "shared patient record" is used throughout the article. Synonymously, the term "patient–provider partnerships" is attached to the use of these integrated PHRs. In a true partnership, however, the patient participates. And that means she participates in the addition, change, and deletion of portions of her medical record. Although the integrated PHR proposed in the article is a step in the right direction, it is not a big enough step. It is up to all of us as patients, and as e-patients, to push for true participation.

In a comment on Dave's post, Stef Verlinden remarks:

To solve this we need to start to create new ‘participatory health information systems’ in which participation in combination with information systems based on open standards leading to citizen/patient centric ‘health information’. The PHR should be an essential part of such an integrated health record that primary purpose is the support of continuing, efficient and quality integrated health care and it contains information that is retrospective, concurrent and prospective. (ISO/DTR 20514).

That pretty much sums it up.



Paul C. Tang, M.D., & Thomas H. Lee, M.D. (2009). Your Doctor's Office or the Internet? Two Paths to Personal Health Records The New England Journal of Medicine, 360, 1276-1278 DOI: 19321866

Tags

101 (6) 2009 (1) ACTH (3) addison's (2) adenoma (10) adrenal (6) adrenal adenomas (2) adrenal insufficiency (8) adrenalectomy (1) androgens (2) anger (1) animals (1) antibiotic (1) apathy (1) apnea (1) arginine (1) attitude (2) awareness (19) bacteria (1) bariatric (4) bilateral adrenalectomy; zebra (2) BLA (6) blog carnival (1) blogging (1) blogtalkradio (1) blood work (1) buffalo hump (1) cancer (1) carcinoma (1) cardiovascular (2) change (1) chronic (1) chronic illness (8) circadian (2) classical (1) cold (2) conn's (1) cortef (1) corticosteriod (2) cortisol (7) CSF (1) CT scan (1) cure (1) cushing (1) cushing's (77) cyberchondriac (2) cyclic (2) data (1) database (1) death (4) depression (1) dexamethasone (1) diabetes (3) diabetes insipidus (1) diagnose (1) diagnosis (10) disease (1) diurnal (2) doctor (3) doctor blogs (21) doctor friedman (1) doctors (2) doctors google (1) drugs (2) dynamic MRI (2) ectopic (2) education (1) EHR (1) EMR (1) endocrine (5) endocrinology (1) epatients (5) epigenetics (4) epinephrine (1) episodic (2) estrogen (1) familial (2) fat (1) fatigue (1) ferritin (2) florid (1) flu (1) fluid control (1) food (1) gadolinium (2) galactorrhea (1) gamma knife (3) genetics (3) genotropin (1) gland (1) google (1) google health (1) googling (2) grand rounds (4) growth hormone (13) guest post (1) headache (2) health care system (14) health records (4) healthcare (1) HIPAA (1) hirsutism (1) holiday (4) home (1) hoofbeats (1) hormone (1) hormones (5) hormones bioidentical (1) HRT (1) hurt (1) hypercortisolism (1) hyperplasia (1) hypertension (1) hyperthyroidism (2) hypoparathyroidism (1) hypopitiutarism (4) hypothalamus (2) hypothyroidism (7) iatrogenic (1) ice crunching (1) illness (3) imaging (4) immune (1) immunocompromised (1) infection (2) information (2) insurance (2) internet (1) invisible illness (1) iron (1) journey (2) ketoconazole (3) kidney (1) labs (2) lapband (1) laproscopic (1) levaquin (2) libido (1) macroadenoma (2) medical records (2) medical school (1) men (1) metabolic syndrome (3) metamorphosis (1) microadenoma (1) microscopy (1) mild (1) morbidity (2) mortality (1) MRI (2) MRSA (1) mucinex (1) neuroblastoma (1) news (10) night owl (1) nodules (1) norepinephrine (1) obesity (13) obesity hunger willpower (2) Occam's Blade (1) OFM (1) osteoporosis (2) pain (4) parathyroid (3) participatory medicine (2) pasireotide (1) patient rights (2) patients (7) patientsfirst (1) PCOS (6) PCP (1) pediatric (2) peer reviewed (1) percocet (1) personal (1) PET (1) phenotype (1) pheochromoctyoma (1) pheochromocytoma (1) PHR (3) pictures (1) pituitary (24) pituitary surgery (7) pituitary tumor adenoma research acromegaly (1) poll (1) polycystic (2) prolactinoma (1) protein (1) psychological (1) radiation (1) radio; cushing's (2) rant (1) recurrence (1) reform (2) relationships (1) remission (2) research (26) respect (1) retrospective (4) rocephin (1) safari (1) salivary (2) sarcoidosis (1) science (1) serum cortisol (1) shame (1) sick (1) sinus (1) sinus infection (2) sinusitis (1) sleep (2) soda (1) spoon theory (1) steriod (1) steroids (1) subclinical (2) surgery (11) surgeXperiences (2) survival (1) symptom (1) technology (1) temozolomide (1) testing (6) testosterone (2) thyroid (6) to google (1) top10 (1) transsphenoidal endoscopic (1) travel (2) treatment (3) trust (1) tumor (12) twitter (5) urinary free cortisol (2) urinary infection (2) UTI (1) veteran (1) video (3) Vitamin D (6) weakness (1) zebra (5) zippy (1)

Email me....

survivethejourney at gmail dot com

Subscribe via email

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner