Guest Author: Student

I was asked, as a student of UW-La Crosse, to give my opinion on the current health care reform, and in particular, my opinion regarding the role of technology in health care. Since I am a sociology/ criminal justice major, I must admit that I do not know a ton about the health care reform bill- however, after reading the previous reform statements by the blog authors, I can tell you what I agree with and what I disagree with.

I definitely agree that there should be a huge push towards preventative care. I was amazed at the huge cost of a colonoscopy. My grandpa had colon cancer so my Dad just recently got his first colonoscopy, and from what I can imagine it does not sound like a pleasant procedure. Luckily, we had insurance to cover the cost. I am very thankful for that fact that we have insurance, but even more I am thankful that the technology is available to my family to have a colonoscopy. I know many people do not have this privilege.

However, I also agree that preventive medicine can sometimes go way too far. Because of this, I agree with the Technology Reform Proposal 1 that states that many physicians perform numerous expensive and unnecessary tests to basically cover their butt if they were to get sued later on down the road. I think that something definitely needs to be done about the high costs of premiums for malpractice insurance, and there should also be a limit as to how much one can sue for. I know from experience that when a family member dies, a way of coping with your sadness and grief can be blaming their death on somebody else. All too often, the blame is put on the physician in charge of the deceased person’s care. Something needs to be done to put the money hospitals have been wasting on malpractice insurance to good use.

After reading these blogs, there is one thing I would like to point out that has been only mentioned briefly. Even though I am all for spending money on technology that can provide better diagnosis, quicker cures, and a better efficiency- I think that overspending could happen very easily. I would say that many people would want the latest and greatest technological procedure done – even if it is not any more beneficial than a standard, inexpensive procedure. Therefore, I think an important part of the reform should be an analysis of each technological procedure to see if the benefits really outweigh the costs.

Overall- I think that as Americans we should be proud of the efforts that we have put into technology and continue to provide the best healthcare for the most people possible. I agree that we need to cut money somewhere- but technology is just not the place to do it in my eyes.

- Jacob Lucey

Guest Author: Health Care Patient

I agree that a universal paperless medical records system should be a key component to healthcare reform. The ability for a medical provider to quickly access your complete and detailed medical records could be critical to your health, and help reduce cost by limiting redundant testing.

At the age of 53 I have witnessed the progression of my personal medical records from a hard copy paper file, to a detailed paperless system currently used by my medical provider. During medical checkup visits as few as 8 years ago my Doctor would finger through a one-inch thick paper file to try to quickly get up to speed on my history. It was apparent that it was critical that I kept a mental track of my own medical history regarding previous medical conditions or treatments so you could bring the Doctor up to date. Since then the large medical group that I go to has developed their own paperless system that I believe has greatly help in my care.

I have diabetes, and with this chronic medical condition come frequent doctor visits, numerous lab tests and several changes in my medications. Now during my visits the Doctor pulls up my detailed medical records on their computer which summarizes my long medical history. The system shows my medications, previous treatments, and a history of my lab results. With a click he can drill down into the system and pull up detailed records from years ago. He pulls up graphs showing my blood sugar history to review the changes base on various medications, and makes adjustments to the medications. The system allows him to explain the treatments and affects from visit to visit. As I have visited other specialists within the same medical group my records followed me. The specialist Doctor starts my visit by pulling up my medical records electronically and has complete access to my history. I believe the tools provided in this medical records system has significantly improved my care.

Unfortunately this system is not universal, and not available to medical providers outside this specific medical group. With a uniform universal medical records system a provider anywhere across the country could access my records and provide care based on my history. With the continually increasing mobility of our society it becomes more important that our medical history can follow us.

A universal medical records system would obviously improve the quality of care for patients that travel or those that move frequently. However, a universal system would also provided savings by greatly limiting the redundant testing.

If you had to visit an emergency room in another state, quickly access your history would be a great advantage to the medical provider. Your medical history could allow the doctor to eliminate some of the lab tests or treatment procedures that he would normally need to perform for someone with an unknown history. The system would result in a better quality of care and a reduction in the cost of you treatment. Based on the number of emergency room and walk-in clinic visits the quality of care and savings in reduced testing would be a significant improvement to the current system.

For the poor and homeless in our country, who have had only limited access to medical treatment due to the costs or their transient life style, an accessible medical history could have a dramatic improvement on the quality of the little health care they do receive.

With all the various proposals for medical reform, I believe that a universal paperless medical records system would have a direct positive impact on the health care quality and costs. With the current and constantly improving technology the implementation of the system is possible at a relatively low cost, and would be easily paid for by the savings in the reduction in inappropriate or redundant testing.

Mark, Health Care Patient

Guest Author: Student

As a student, I am very aware of the money I spend on Health Care. I am in a situation where my parents own their own business, so they must buy private health insurance. Since the deductibles are so high, we usually only go to the doctor when absolutely necessary. However, when I do go to the doctor, technology is a huge part of deciding on the hospital I want to go do.

After reading the reform proposals, I am at an agreement with the authors of this blog. Technology is definitely something that deserves major funding. For example, I think having all health care records electronic is not only cost effective in the long run, but extremely efficient. I have spent way too much time at the doctor’s office filling out endless sheets of past medical history, most of which I don’t remember. I am actually more comfortable with all my information in a computer, rather than on a piece of paper floating around the doctor’s office. This may be a generation opinion since my generation tends to be more comfortable and trusting of technology versus the older population.

I also agree with the authors that preventative medicine should be pushed and rewarded. I spend a semester in Ireland, and though my experience I have realized that preventive medicine should be a priority for Americans. Technology plays a huge rule in preventative medicine. It offers the ability for early detection of heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and other life threatening diseases.

Like I said, I don’t go to the doctor much, but when I do, I expect the technology to be up to date and reliable. Just a few months ago, my sister had her first baby and she picked her hospital, out of all the hospitals in the Green Bay and Appleton area, primarily because it had a Neonatal Intensive Unit that could provide the best care for her baby. She wasn’t expecting any problems or a premature birth, but just having the technology available is extremely comforting. I know that if I or anyone in my family had a life threatening disease, I would make sure to go the hospital with the best technology to treat that disease, despite of the high costs. I know many people would do the same thing.

I will say that the health care system problem is complex. It is hard to find the perfect program, which might not even exist, but we should look for better solutions and try to implement them. I understand that the main objective for proposing a health care reform care propose is to cut down on costs, but I strong agree with the authors that technology is not an area where costs should be cut.

- Ross E.

Guest Author: Health Care Worker

As a healthcare provider, the topics discussed in this Technology Blog ring true for the most part. I would like to address a few key points posted on this blog. Without question, having an electronic medical record keeping system that is universal would be ideal for all of the reasons stated by the authors here. However, from recent experience in my own medical center, I have learned that the transition to an electronic system is not without its drawbacks. In May of 2009, my large facility made the transition to electronic medical record keeping. The cost of doing so is astronomical, estimated at 12 million dollars…and that’s just for the technology and support. The endless hours spent by healthcare providers to learn how to use the new system added substantially more. There was much frustration among the doctors and nurses who were trying to find ways to chart things, but it often times was like fitting a round peg in a square hole. Getting customized reports is a challenge as well, vs. the pre-configured reports the system is programmed to generate. Flexibility is the biggest drawback of electronic charting, along with the ability of older healthcare providers to manage the computer technology (vs. younger providers who were raised on technology). On the subject of scanning and treatment technology advances, the more the better! The problem is that our healthcare industry is profit-based…based on capitalism. Companies that conduct research and develop such technologies want to make money on their products, and don’t want to be told (by government) how much they are going to be paid for its use. This is the primary disconnect in trying to use technology to lower healthcare costs. The government’s wiliness to step in and mandate fee caps has been minimal, in fear of suppressing competition and development. Its much the same in the Pharmaceutical industry…people can’t afford medications because the drug companies want to make the most money they can on what they invent. On the subject of access, clearly, those without health insurance at all place a huge burden on society and the healthcare providers themselves. Medicare reimbursement rates are dismal in the Midwest, but the cost of healthcare is still pretty high. Universal healthcare is a bad word these days in many circles, but unless there is some sort of acceptable baseline healthcare for everyone, hospitals will continue to lay off workers or keep reducing the quality of the personnel/care provided to save money and survive. This is especially true in the “critical access” hospitals of the rural states…some only have 25 beds. This means they cannot purchase expensive, cutting edge technology to keep up with other institutions, or pay the salaries of top notch healthcare providers…so they go practice somewhere else. Finally, the blog’s point about tort reform is right on. Healthcare providers make mistakes…they are human, not machines. Lawsuits drive the practice of medicine, and are responsible for medically unjustified procedures and tests in every hospital in every state. People should be held responsible for their mistakes, but plaintiff/punitive awards are out of control. FEMA estimated the average value of a human life lost during Hurricane Katrina at roughly $5.7 million dollars. If FEMA can do it, so can others.