The digital health space refers to the integration of technology and health care services to improve the overall quality of health care delivery. It encompasses a wide range of innovative and emerging technologies such as wearables, telehealth, artificial intelligence, mobile health, and electronic health records (EHRs). The digital health space offers numerous benefits such as improved patient outcomes, increased access to health care, reduced costs, and improved communication and collaboration between patients and health care providers. For example, patients can now monitor their vital signs such as blood pressure and glucose levels from home using wearable devices and share the data with their doctors in real-time. Telehealth technology allows patients to consult with their health care providers remotely without having to travel to the hospital, making health care more accessible, particularly in remote or rural areas. Artificial intelligence can be used to analyze vast amounts of patient data to identify patterns, predict outcomes, and provide personalized treatment recommendations. Overall, the digital health space is rapidly evolving, and the integration of technology in health

Monday, October 14, 2013

EHRs and Excrement

 

EHRs, EMRs,HIEs,HITECH, MEANINFUL USE, AFFORDABLE CARE, HEALTH BENEFIT EXCHANGES,

                          

As far back as 2005 I  pontificated about the misdirection and poor design of EHRs.  Ethnology was and is uppermost in my attitude about electronic medical record systems.

Human-Machine interfaces are critical for accuracy, and efficiency. Not only is a poorly designed H-M interface (call it a GUI if you must) a liability it drastically alters good clinical practices. It greatly increases fatigability and frustration for users.  Most important is that it disrupts the face-face provider bond eye to eye contact.  No patient is going to believe a provider is interested in them when the provider is  staring at a computer screen or waiting on the PC to catch up. 

EHRs do not simplify nor make a broken practice work better. That used to be an important criteria. Today the feds have muddled an already hazy future for HIT, with incentives, penalties, meaningful use criteria.  All these meant to rush acceptance of HIT which is not ready for prime time.  As usual HHS has primed the pump for more rapid medical inflation (despite their unending programs to ‘flatten the cost curve of health care)

I see a future with greatly increased costs for health care with mandated HIT. The incentives are an example where it will backfire on the  providers who naively accept it, .

Perhaps the system can spin it as cost saving device,but for whom"?  I see my overhead rising and rising.

Darwinian health IT: Only well-designed EHRs will survive

                                     

Medsphere Systems Corporation  Edmund Billings, MD, is the chief medical officer for Medsphere Systems Corporation

Recently Dr Billings wrote about EHR dissatisfaction in HealthCare IT News

Health IT assumes healthcare will buy what we’re selling because the feds are paying them to. And, like the Pinto,and the Edsel what we’re selling inspires something less than awe. In short, we are failing our clinical users.

Myopic efforts to meet certification and compliance requirements have added functionality and effort tangential to the care of the patient. Clinicians feel like they are working for the system instead of it working for them. The best EHRs are focused on helping physicians take care of patients, with Meaningful Use and ICD-10 derivative of patient care and documentation.

Dissatisfaction is increasing regardless of practice type or EHR system. These findings highlight the need for the Meaningful Use program and EHR manufacturers to focus on improving EHR features and usability to help reduce inefficient work flows, improve error rates and patient care, and for practices to recognize the importance of ongoing training at all stages of EHR adoption.

Additional survey results show dramatic and pervasive dissatisfaction:

  • Clinicians who would not recommend their EHR to a colleague increased from 24 percent in 2010 to 39 percent in 2012.
  • 34 percent of users were “very dissatisfied” with the ability of their EHR to decrease workload — an increase from 19 percent in 2010.
  • 32 percent of responders had not returned to normal productivity since EHR implementation compared with 20 percent in 2010.
  • Dissatisfaction with ease of use increased from 23 percent in 2010 to 37 percent in 2012.
  • Satisfaction with ease of use dropped from 61 to 48 percent.

According to Modern Healthcare, natural selection may already be taking place in the EHR environment as Meaningful Use 2014 and Stage 2 introduce more exacting requirements. The magazine’s review of federal records shows a massive drop in the number of health IT systems being tested for Stage 1 2014 and Stage 2 certification.  While around 1,000 EHR technologies were certified for 2011 Stage 1 requirements, as of last week only 79 systems were certified for 2014 standards. Almost all companies are scrambling. Some will get certified in time. Many more won’t.  What will current users do if their systems are not upgraded to Stages II-IV? How much will it cost them?

 

This is just the beginning of the shakeout … there is an asset bubble in electronic health records and health IT,” said Dr. David Brailer, founder and CEO of Health Evolution Partners and former head of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.

“The data suggests that it is likely we’ll see a sizable reduction in the number of EHR vendors listed for 2014 edition certification,” predicted Steven Posnack, director of federal policy, and Dustin Charles, a public health analyst, on the ONC’s September 13 blog post

MU is not really about patient care.  It’s about data which HHS claims will improve outcomes.

                          

At the end of my day, it is what it is….millions of man-hours have gone into what we used today.  It is going to take time to hew out the bad, smooth out the rough edges, fill in the potholes….and if all goes well we will most likely have bankrupted the health  system (to say nothing about the Affordable Care Act.)

 

In one of my upcoming blogs I will discuss the ICD-10.

 

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

The Perfect Storm

 

I have used this metaphor, the perfect storm, several times during the past ten years to sum up the simultaneous multiple counter-intuitive shifts in medicine .

Another perfect storm has developed with the confluence of health information exchanges, health IT, the affordable care act, and the debt crisis as well as congressional gridlock.

Storm # 1 (to be named)

Health Benefit Exchanges:  The initial rollout has been sporadic with variability in reliability and accessibility. Initial success is much greater in the state sponsored and operated online health benefit exchange portals.  The federal HBE at Healthcare.gov has  receive a failing grade from consumers attempting to sign up for the individual mandated coverage.  Most reach the page shown on the Healthcare.gov portal.

Why are the state sponsored sites working well and the federal site poorly? What exactly is plaguing the federal insurance marketplace website, healthcare.gov, even as most state exchanges are functioning well, remains unknown. But Web developers and software engineers across the country have a few ideas. In the best tradition of the Internet, they've been crowdsourcing their various diagnoses on Reddit, the popular social media site.

The difficulties appear to be more technical than political. The sheer scale of a national network are much greater than individual state networks. The individual state networks stand alone and depending on which state the national HBE link will take you to the state HBX.  However if the state HBX is run by the FEDS it is a different story.  The Reddit site goes into much detail by ‘nerds and geeks’.

Those who are familiar with the DOD EMR and the VAEMR know how many years and iterations have occurred with those systems.

Second guessing is always easier to do than getting it right the first time. Heavy initial demand may be part of the problem as everyone tried to sign on at once.

HHS, CMS and federal contractors, meanwhile, are trying to address problems they find through testing and that are reported from users, all while asking for patience from would-be shoppers and encouraging them to visit assistance centers or to call and speak with navigators.

However despite the IT nature of the challenge it makes a bad political statement for the Affordable Care Act along with other postponements such as the employer mandates and many other waivers.

While the HBXs undergo a shakeout and even if they are running smoothly, that is only the high tech side of it. The real ‘back end’ is how consumers and insurers will face off after the application process.  What health systems (insurers, hospitals, and providers) will be ready and operating correctly.

We should not forget what this is all about….patients.   We always need to remember this is about patient and patient care….high tech serves them and it should never be the master//

Doctors are cautious about HIX, says MGMA, and many 
say they're still weighing their options

Storm #2

Docs 'stressed and unhappy' about EHRs. No less important and on the other side of the equation is the effect EMRs have had on efficiency and quality of care.  Regardless of what data analytics, statisticians, and bean counters claim EMR is affecting quality of care at the bedside, and in the clinic. Patients, despite their wanting their MD to use EMRs find that the next clinic encounter their ‘beloved’ doctor is paying more attention to his tablet, or laptop.

While physicians recognize the benefits of electronic health records, they also complain that many systems deployed nowadays are cumbersome to use and often act as obstacles to quality care, according to a new report from RAND Corporation.

The most poignant results from physician surveys: (Rand)

While physicians recognize the benefits of electronic health records, they also complain that many systems deployed nowadays are cumbersome to use and often act as obstacles to quality care, according to a new report from RAND Corporation.

The findings are from a project, sponsored by the American Medical Association, designed to identify influences on doctors' professional satisfaction – a snapshot of physician sentiment as the U.S. healthcare system moves toward new delivery and payment models.

Docs who were surveyed expressed concern that current EHR technology interferes with face-to-face discussions with patients, requires physicians to spend too much time performing clerical work and degrades the accuracy of medical records by encouraging template-generated notes, according to the RAND report.

In addition, they worry that the technology has been more costly than expected, and cited frustrations about poor EHRinteroperability, which prevents the transmission of patient data when and where it's needed.

"Physicians believe in the benefits of electronic health records, and most do not want to go back to paper charts," said Friedberg in a press statement. "But at the same time, they report that electronic systems are deeply problematic in several ways. Physicians are frustrated by systems that force them to do clerical work or distract them from paying close attention to their patients."

Other items that have created physician frustration are given in the article (page 1)

Administrators of all sizes, and shapes love this stuff…numbers,graphs and seemingly measurable data objectified. It’s a digital world. However patients and medical care are analog. It may be excellent for imaging and lab reports.

 

Monday, October 7, 2013

Google Expanding role in Health Information Technology

 

Google Offers HIPAA Business Associate Agreements for Google Apps

Monday, October 7, 2013

Last month, Google announced that a HIPAA business associate agreement for Google Apps is available, TechRepublic reports.

Details of Business Associate Agreement

The business associate agreement applies only to certain Google App services, such as:

  • Gmail;
  • Google Calendar;
  • Google Drive; and
  • Google Apps Vault.

To sign up, a health care organization administrator must answer three online questions:

  • Are you a covered entity (or business associate of a covered entity) under HIPAA?;
  • Will you be using Google Apps in connection with protected health information?; and
  • Are you authorized to request and agree to a business associate agreement with Google for your Google Apps domain?

After responding to the questions, the health care administrator will be taken to the online business associate agreement (Wolber, TechRepublic, 10/2).

Implications

According to Health IT Security, the business associate agreement could help remove a barrier for some health care organizations to adopt Google applications, particularly for smaller organizations that use fewer Google App services.

However, for larger organizations that use more than Gmail, Google Calendar and Google Drive as part of their cloud services package, the Google business associate agreement will likely not have a significant effect, Health IT Security reports (Ouellette, Health IT Security, 10/3). 

Sunday, October 6, 2013

Leading the Charge in Wireless Health (continued) Part II

Watch this video

from an article from CNN by Leslie Saxon M.D.

When it comes to digital health products, the prevailing attitude among physicians is still deep suspicion. While many people look at physicians as the drivers of change in digital health, I am in the minority of innovators in this field. There are some physicians who are on the vanguard of talking about it, but only a few are actual innovators. Many of the advances will come from non-healthcare innovators–the “pull through” demand will come from the public who recognize the benefits of new technology to help them become healthier and smarter about their lives.

It is ironic but technology has taken me back to my patients, who are the reason I entered medicine so many years ago. Just as digital technology has enabled us to stay connected to others, it has helped me connect more immediately with my patients. For the patients there is more control as well. Just as we control our finances, our schedules, our travel plans, and music selections through technology we can have greater control over our health and our care.

Technology will always be second to Patient Care.  Patients will remain central to all of reform. Physicians, hospitals, and other health care providers must make this their compass.

The fact is that Life with a capital L—my patients’ real, authentic experiences—mostly happen outside of my office. How can I make better observations? How can I—a highly trained person with 25 years of experience—take my knowledge and help more people? Or, help my patients at a deeper level? How can I be a better witness to their story, edit it, and make it better? There are new answers and we hold them in the palms of our hands.

Technologic advances don’t happen in isolation. There are many different elements— cultural and technologic — that must come together to turn an innovation into a scalable business product, and then, possibly—but rarely—a cultural phenomenon.

The internet, for example, changed banking, journalism, and commerce in many parts of the world. But the connection, information, and convenience it afforded missed medicine because the innovation and the cultural desire hadn’t yet arrived. Advancing technologies will soon radically change healthcare. The cultural and technologic pieces are coming together like a rising storm. I remember, like it was yesterday, when we hosted our first University of Southern California Body Computing Conference. It was in 2007.

I wanted to bring together various experts, from Academy Award winners to engineers, to imagine the future of healthcare in a digital world. In several instances, people left in a huff, or laughed off the notion of digital technology changing healthcare. Many of the physician-attendees said the change wouldn’t happen “for two decades.”

The reactions interested me because, in my experience, where there is anger, there is also fear and irrationality.
Just this week Congressional hearings debated digital medicine because lawmakers and regulators recognize that there are hundreds of millions of dollars—including the $10 million Tricorder X Prize—being invested in new, consumer-oriented technology. And these products will soon start hitting the market. At this point, some of the products are more marketing fluff than reality, while others are too difficult to use.

 

 

But there is a realization that consumers want, and need, products to connect them with their physicians, their medical records, and with relatives who are helping to manage their care. Mobile phones and other ubiquitous devices are becoming so advanced that the technology within them can be turned into a “health device.” Having changed music and communication, consumer device makers are looking for new revenue streams and they are identifying health as a way to create new revenue streams, and the result will be a change in medicine, which has been working from a 2,000 year old paternalistic doctor-patient model. Guided by Apple Computer Inc., digital technology changed the music industry. Why not change medicine?

When it comes to digital health products, the prevailing attitude among physicians is still deep suspicion. While many people look at physicians as the drivers of change in digital health, I am in the minority of innovators in this field. There are some physicians who are on the vanguard of talking about it, but only a few are actual innovators. Many of the advances will come from non-healthcare innovators–the “pull through” demand will come from the public who recognize the benefits of new technology to help them become healthier and smarter about their lives.

Shortly after the first USC Body Computing Conference, I started a center at the University of Southern California to study and create health solutions. We study digital health by evaluating products in clinical and non-clinical settings, as well as create a variety of solutions, including health games. Calling myself an innovator still feels pretentious. True innovation is really difficult. Being in the innovation trenches has taught me many lessons and given me new respect for the world’s innovators. Being creative and bringing different expertise together is difficult but critical in digital health. We work with different innovators, athletes, engineers, story-tellers and others because health is an all-encompassing issue that a physician alone cannot solve. Working with many of the smartest people in this field, as well as bringing “creative” into medicine, has given me a more holistic view. Being around so many “creative types”—and being exposed to soon-to-be-released technology has also given me special insight into the way the world will look in the near future:

1.  Body worn sensors that can transmit your heart rate, blood pressure, brain waves, and other vital signs. Physicians will be looking at this data, and calling you to check in with your specialist;

2.  Medical content that is of high quality and accurate and specific to you. Currently, medical content is generalized and not very compelling. (We did a study at USC that showed that many popular medical sites have inaccurate information.) Several companies are working on how to “mash up” different bio statistics. It may seem unusual for you to record your every heart beat today, but it might not be too farfetched for your children. Soon there will be inexpensive, tattoo-like sensors that will record information and filter it through analytics—without relying on highly subjective information;

3. New applications that help patients with chronic diseases manage their care, lab results, multiple physicians and medication, and reward patients. A major issue in medicine is compliance. As a physician, I can only get a snapshot of your life, but if I can learn more about you, and if you can help learn yourself, we will be better partners in your care. Eventually, with the information that we learn, we can spend our resources more wisely. There are a lot of promises around Big Data: there are a lot of smart people working on ways to capture and design smart analytics to sift through terabytes of data that could impact millions, if not billions, of people.

Even in the most developing of countries, mobile technology is pervasive. An example of what this could mean: just last year, I was sitting at home. Someone was using a smart phone ECG on the other side of the world. I diagnosed a Nigerian, traveling in Mumbai, who had a heart condition. I can use my unique knowledge and training to help more people, not just my patients in Los Angeles.

There will be people who read these predictions and dismiss them. What about reimbursements? What about FDA regulations? Won’t insurance companies use this information negatively? Won’t there just be medical white noise?

The questions are valid, and they need to be asked. It is always easy to over-simplify and get caught up in the hype. But—as I have learned from other innovators—demanding simplification can return fascinating results. There is a good lesson in the music industry, which stood by helplessly as their industry changed during the digital revolution. There is rapid change happening, and it’s how we address it early, and use the technology to help people, that will dictate our children’s lives. Saying it won’t happen just shows willful blindness.

I welcome the questions. But I’m optimistic. I see the innovation first hand. As a physician, I can see the possibilities for good.

Helping patients deal with the emotions that come with health issues is a large part of the "art" of doctoring. People see their lives and their health as a story. Since that first Body Computing Conference in 2007, I have spent more time with storytellers, especially my colleagues at USC’s School of Cinematic Arts. I have learned a lot about the power of story, of how the story of our lives is in many ways a health narrative.

It is ironic but technology has taken me back to  patients, who are the reason I entered medicine so many years ago. Just as digital technology has enabled us to stay connected to others, it has helped me connect more immediately with my patients. For the patients there is more control as well. Just as we control our finances, our schedules, our travel plans, and music selections through technology we can have greater control over our health and our care.

The fact is that Life with a capital L—my patients’ real, authentic experiences—mostly happen outside of my office. How can I make better observations? How can I—a highly trained person with 25 years of experience—take my knowledge and help more people? Or, help my patients at a deeper level? How can I be a better witness to their story, edit it, and make it better? There are new answers and we hold them in the palms of our hands.