CommonWell Is a Shame and a Missed Opportunity

This is a story about how major data holders are moving to consolidate THEIR control over the collection and use of our personal health information.

Instead of building electronic health systems that enable us to decide who can see and use our health data, we are locked out and have no way to know who is using our data or what it’s used for.

-Deborah Peel

From The Health Care Blog article: CommonWell Is a Shame and a Missed Opportunity

“The big news at HIMSS13 was the unveiling of CommonWell (Cerner, McKesson, Allscripts, athenahealth, Greenway and RelayHealth) to “get the ball rolling” on data exchange across disparate technologies. The shame is that another program with opaque governance by the largest incumbents in health IT is being passed off as progress. The missed opportunity is to answer the call for patient engagement and the frustrations of physicians with EHRs and reverse the institutional control over the physician-patient relationship. Physicians take an oath to put their patient’s interest above all others while in reality we are manipulated to participate in massive amounts of unwarranted care.

There’s a link between healthcare costs and health IT. The past months have seen frustration with this manipulation by industry hit the public media like never before. Early this year, National Coordinator for Health Information Technology Farzad Mostashari, MD, called for “moral and right” action on the part of some EHR vendors, particularly when it comes to data lock-in and pricing transparency. On February 19, a front page article in the New York Times exposed the tactics of some of the founding members of CommonWell in grabbing much of the $19 Billion of health IT incentives while consolidating the industry and locking out startups and innovators. That same week, Time magazine’s cover story is a special report on health care costs and analyzes how the US wastes $750 Billion a year and what that means to patients. To round things out, the March issue of Health Affairs, published a survey showing that “the average physician would lose $43,743 over five years” as a result of EHR adoption while the financial benefits go to the vendors and the larger institutions…”

Dr. Peel at Authors’ Roundtable at HIMSS 2013

Dr. Deborah Peel, PPR Founder & Chair, will join her co-authors to talk about pressing privacy issues raised in HIMSS’s just released book, Information Privacy in the Evolving Healthcare Environment. As a co-author, Dr. Peel’s contributing chapter discusses patients’ rights to privacy and consent and outlines the auditable criteria of PPR’s Trust Framework, which includes 15 clear principles to ensure meaningful consent within all electronic systems.

Purchase the book here.

Restoring patient control over PHI will be a key topic discussed, with additional focus on the technologies and laws needed to address the gaps and flaws in the Omnibus Privacy Rule.

Date: Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Time: 11:00 AM CT
Where:
HIMSS 2013 Annual Conference and Exhibition
Room 213
New Orleans Ernest N. Morial Convention Center
900 Convention Center Boulevard
New Orleans, Louisiana

An advocate for patients’ rights to health privacy since 2004, when she formed PPR, Dr. Peel has led the charge for more stringent data privacy and security protections, as well as tough new enforcement and penalties for violations that were included in the January 2013 release of the Omnibus Privacy Rule.

HIMSS & Who is Promoting HIT in Stimulus Spending?

This story tells how HIMSS and Harvard’s Blackford Middleton promoted spending billions on health IT in the stimulus bill.

HIMSS and Blackford believe that health technology will be the silver bullet that enables healthcare reform and kills/slows higher costs. That may be possible, but is highly doubtful because the billions are such a bonanza for the health IT industry.

Will this be yet another example of the stimulus billions being used to prop up large corporations, but not to save individual patients who are sick?

Not only does most of health IT vendor industry NOT care about whether healthcare reform succeeds or not, they actively fought to weaken Americans’ rights to privacy and security. By law, industry cares about maximizing revenue, not treating the sick.

So the BIG question is: will the government require all electronic health records systems to have the tough privacy and security measures the public expects and needs to trust these systems? Will the government require electonic health systems to build in our legal and ethical rights to privacy up front?

Most of the HIT industry lobbied to sell the same old dinosaur products and against privacy. The incumbents are very powerful and not interested in change OR IN OUR PRIVACY RIGHTS.

The Machinery Behind Health-Care Reform

Robert O’Harrow tells the story of how Harvard, Harvard Partners HealthCare, Blackford Middleton, and the Health Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS), the health IT industry’s lobby, got $27B for HIT into the stimulus bill.

HIMSS used classic industry lobbying strategy:
1. Never let a crisis go to waste (in this case the economic crisis) to drive funding for industry.
  1. a. They were very clever because

  • i. The HIT industry was NOT failing (unlike the auto industry) and did not need a stimulus

2. Fund a ‘think tank’ to produce ‘research’ promoting HIT as a way to lower costs, improve healthcare, etc., etc.—in this case headed by Blackford Middleton MD of Harvard.
3. Use the ‘research’ to promote HIT and lobby for stimulus funds.
-Harvard-branded  ‘research’ is very powerful:
  1. b. Non-profit organizations were funded “
  2. to press for electronic health records”

  3. c. Blumenthal, Daschle, and the Obama Administration were ‘sold’ on the ‘research’.
  4. d. The ‘research’ gave Blumenthal, Daschle, and the Obama Administration a way to justify dismissing the problems OMB and other sceptics raised about the ‘research’
  • iii. Mark Frisse and Joseph Antos are sceptics quoted about the ‘research’.
  1. e. Congress was ‘sold’ on the ‘research’ which claims that HIT will reduce costs, etc.
4. HIMSS and the Harvard ‘think tank’ draft much of HITECH’s plan to purchase flawed HIT systems.
5. Congress passed the stimulus bill with $2B more for HIT than the $25B HIMSS recommended
6. Industry wins.
7. Public loses.
  1. f. The public’s expectations and rights of control over health information are eliminated by funding flawed HIT/EHRs and data exchanges.

The result almost 4 years later is we have no idea where our health data is held, who is using it or why—no health data map, no ‘chain of custody’ for where our data flows, no way to control health data in electronic systems or data exchanges, and no way to stop data sales (a recent example is Medtronics selling records from patients’ wireless heart monitors).

Soon, we will finally be able to download electronic copies of our health data, a crucial first step to restoring control over our own information. Once we have all our health information, then we can press to restore control over whi can see, use or sell it.
To view the full article, please visit: The Machinery Behind Health-Care Reform