March 25, 2010
4:02 pm
The op-ed piece by Deborah Peel, who heads the Coalition for Patient Privacy, that appeared in The Wall Street Journal this week received an inordinate amount of attention. That’s because Matt Drudge of the popular Drudge Report website seized upon the Journal’s headline, “Your Medical Records Aren’t Secure” and listed it among several other stories critical of President Obama’s healthcare plan.
But Dr. Peel’s op-ed wasn’t criticizing the President. The targets of her op-ed included hospitals, pharmacies, employers and a litany of others who are out to plunder our personal medical records for financial gain. And, she alleges, these violations of confidentiality are even easier and more likely when health records are maintained electronically instead of on paper. She insists that the answer lies in giving patients the responsibility to decide what information they choose to share with medical professionals and what to keep secret.
Dr. Peel’s logic train goes off the tracks rather quickly. First of all, it’s simply not true that electronic records are less secure than paper ones. In her op-ed, she chooses to not acknowledge the role HIPAA privacy laws have played in keeping health information confidential. She ignores the new laws adopted earlier this year that strongly encourage encryption of electronic data and that impose new criminal and civil penalties for privacy violations. And you would never know from the op-ed in the Journal that hospitals, insurers and physicians throughout the country have taken extraordinary steps to safeguard patient data.
So we can see that any privacy “crisis” is overblown. The greater problem lies in the proposed solutions.
Giving patients the responsibility to decide which portions of their medical records should be open to healthcare professionals is, at best, unreasonable and, at worst, potentially deadly. It is highly unlikely that a patient without a medical background can make a sound decision on what information a physician might need to provide quality treatment.
But an even greater potential harm lies in the society-wide impact of ill-advised patient consent proposals. Enabling system-wide picking and choosing of what data enters the flow of essential information will have an impact on the many beneficial actions that are dependent upon information collection and analysis, such as:
• Reporting and tracking incidences of disease for public health purposes
• Monitoring the quality and safety of medical products
• Carrying out product recalls
• Medical research into lifesaving cures and treatments.
Our health system has dual objectives in this regard. We need to protect patient confidentiality while, at the same time, preserving the vital flow of information that protects, extends and saves lives. Some, as Dr. Peel’s op-ed demonstrates, lose sight of the need to maintain that balance. The fact is, though, that you should never have to choose between privacy and excellent healthcare, and we don’t have to.
January 12, 2010
5:20 pm
We hear it all the time. It’s a nonstop drumbeat. Healthcare in the United States is too expensive and too low in quality compared to other countries. Critics are constantly citing the World Health Organization which, in its most recent rankings, said the U.S. ranks 37th in overall healthcare performance.
In reality, though, what kind of healthcare do Americans receive? And would we really trade what we have for what is offered to citizens in other nations.
Dr. Mark Constantian, a reconstructive surgeon in New Hampshire, investigated that question and shared his conclusions in the Wall Street Journal last week. Dr. Constantian found that, when it comes to the factors that patients and healthcare consumers care about the most, healthcare in this country stacks up pretty well. Read more
November 25, 2009
11:44 am
Last week HLC participated in the Women in Technology roundtable event which gave their members an overview about the role of technology in health reform as it relates to electronic medical records, care management, and identity.
NextGenWeb blogger Shana Glickfield had this to say about the event:
“Women in Technology hosted a roundtable event to give their members a closer look at how healthcare policy intersects with technology. The presentations dove into where our government is heading when it comes to Health IT. Particularly when it comes to Electronic Health Records, the speakers focused on the recent progress in moving these life- (and money-) saving technologies forward.
Tina O. Grande, SVP for Policy at the Healthcare Leadership Council, noted that electronic health records were actually part of the economic stimulus bill (The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act). The bill provides many deadlines, standards and incentives. They include Medicare bonus payments to eligible physicians and hospitals using electronic health records as soon as 2011.”
HLC believes the nationwide use of health information technology, including the development of uniform standards for information-sharing and a national patient privacy standard will create quality improvements and greater patient safety. I would like to thank Shana for highlighting our efforts on health information technology.
August 03, 2009
12:20 pm
With all of the media coverage devoted to the controversial aspects of health reform, most notably the proposal to create a government-run health plan and the possible tax increases that may be used to pay for reform, insufficient attention is given to one of the most important objectives reformers must achieve – how to align healthcare dollars with exceptional healthcare quality.
Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty does a good job spotlighting this issue in an op-ed in today’s Washington Post. He writes about how Washington, DC should look to the states as “models of market-driven, patient-centered and quality-focused reform.” He points toward his own state’s employee healthcare plan which rewards workers for seeking value, lowering their out-of-pocket costs if they choose.
Pawlenty also makes a point that we’ve made repeatedly here at the Healthcare Leadership Council, that there are many health reform ideas that can generate broad, bipartisan support and we shouldn’t sacrifice those at the altar of controversy, non-essential ideas like the government plan option. Read more
July 14, 2009
3:41 pm
Over 40 of the nation’s leading health care companies and organizations told congressional leaders today that health reform will not be successful if its “politically polarizing” and wears “the label of either ideological extreme.”
I’m very pleased that the members of the Healthcare Leadership Council, executives from leading hospitals, health plans, medical device manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, academic health centers, health distributors and other for-profit and not-for-profit sectors today reaffirmed their commitment to health reform in a letter to Senate and House leaders. Read more
CATEGORIES: