3 ms·
So there's a couple of things that are encouraging and a couple of things that are worrying in terms of interoperability. The government is putting its thumb on
by pg_bot 6y ago
So there's a couple of things that are encouraging and a couple of things that are worrying in terms of interoperability. The government is putting its thumb on the scale with (meaningful use/promoting interoperability program) so that facilities adopt systems that can interoperate. So now everything is moving/moved to HL7 and theoretically clinics can transfer your records to one another.
You are never going to get your "full" medical record. The law only gives you access to the "Designated Record Set" as defined in § 45 CFR 164.501. There are also shenanigans going on at the big boys where they are giving patients summary visits, instead of the full note.
I'm not sure if anyone will crack the nut of having your health records in one place. I'm highly doubtful of big tech
solving these problems, since they are not revenue producing and take time to get right. They are also dealing in an area that is highly regulated and not their main line of business. If someone does accomplish it, they will be an EMR or your insurance company.
I also doubt that this is the right target to aim for. The value proposition is that you can understand what is going on with you and easily transfer information to your physician. It's unlikely that you will be able to fully understand what is going on in your medical records. Most records need to be interpreted by a physician due to the information asymmetry in medicine. Lab readouts, x-rays, ekgs, are useless in the hands of a layperson. The speed of getting the information could be useful, but it's generally not practical. Most information can wait 3-7 days (and boy does it take that long) before it gets transferred. If you knew you had someone's complete medical record, you may be able to save on testing, or catch an error before it got serious. However, data sources get forgotten along the way, patients are unreliable with their own medical history, and medicine is shockingly unstandardized.
Reading someone else's medical records can be like stepping into a new codebase for the first time. You will see weird and different patterns people do, and you will often question what the other person was thinking.
I would rather focus on efficiency, there's a lot more low hanging fruit there.
(I founded an EMR company and we work on a lot of these problems)
- nradov 6y agoPretty much every EMR and health insurance insurance company already offers a captive PHR. But they are never complete and aren't portable as the patient moves to other providers or insurers.