Doctors keep licenses despite lawsuits, sexual assaults, even patient deaths thanks to Wisconsin's lax system of oversight that favors doctors over patients. A Journal Sentinel review of five years' worth of disciplinary action found that the board is slow to look into complaints, keeps many of its investigations secret and rarely imposes serious discipline, even when patients die.
Patients admitted to the top-rated hospitals in the United States have an average 27 percent lower risk of dying than patients admitted to other U.S. hospitals, according to a study by an independent healthcare ratings organization. The analysis also found that patients who have surgery at the top-rated hospitals have an average 5 percent lower risk of complications during their hospital stay.
One in five District residents has no regular source of healthcare, and rising rates of hospital visits suggest declining access to doctors and community clinics, according to the most comprehensive report ever of D.C. health issues. The report looked at data on chronic disease, insurance, hospital capacity and emergency services and found much wanting, concluded the Rand Corp., the nonprofit research organization that the D.C. Council commissioned to help the city move forward.
Thousands of Iraq war veterans who could have suffered traumatic brain injury may be getting unnecessary or inadequate healthcare because Veterans Affairs officials have yet to determine whether their initial screening tests are reliable. A draft report by the Government Accountability Office reviews nine VA medical centers and found that months after former VA Secretary Jim Nicholson in April promoted new screenings for brain injury and pledged personal responsibility in seeing them through, the department was still struggling to determine how to best gauge the clinical accuracy of its screenings. In the report, the VA also acknowledged problems with follow-up appointments after veterans initially tested positive under the VA's screening tool. One medical center reported 27 cases in which their doctors failed to notify patients for additional evaluation because of glitches in the computerized program.
A contaminated anticancer drug made by one of China's largest pharmaceutical companies underscores how quality-control problems continue to plague the Chinese drug industry. There is no sign the tainted leukemia drug was exported. But the case provides a cautionary tale as Western pharmaceutical companies start outsourcing some manufacturing to China.
For Americans who listened to President George W. Bush give his final State of the Union speech Monday night, it was the same old story when it comes to healthcare.
Our president told us he wants to see more affordable and accessible healthcare, tax breaks for those without health insurance and an end to junk medical lawsuits. Nothing new there. The president has touted these changes in each of his annual addresses since he first took office in 2001. Hearing the same things year after year, it's easy to believe that the president has achieved little in healthcare during his seven years in office.
That isn't to say that things are just as they were in 2001. The cost of healthcare continues to skyrocket. Frivolous medical malpractice suits continue. Emergency rooms are overburdened. The number of uninsured Americans continues to grow. Hospitals continue to make high profile errors, putting patient lives at risk.
Perhaps the thing that President Bush has made the most progress on is something that he didn't specifically mention during Monday's address: Electronic medical records. First mentioned in his 2004 State of the Union speech, President Bush put forth an effort to have electronic records available to most health consumers by 2014 to improve the quality of healthcare that Americans receive. His idea was to make sure that no matter where a patient sought care, caregivers would have complete access to the patient's medical history and information. Doctors would know what medications the patients were taking, what they were allergic to, and what ailments they've experienced before. There would be no more duplicate tests, no medication interactions, no allergic reactions. Preventing these three things alone could not only make patient care better, but save hospitals and insurance companies money in the long run.
So where are we on this effort? In 2006, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services put out a report about the Health Information Technology Initiative, outlining its progress on gathering information and creating uniform standards for electronic record use. The first national coordinator for health IT, an advisor to the secretary of HHS, was appointed to give advice on the actions needed to make electronic records a reality. Committees were formed to examine health IT products, security, anti-fraud activities, standardized adoption methods, best practice guidelines and more. One of these committees, the Certification Commission for Healthcare Information Technology, certified 37 electronic health record products for use in clinician offices in 2006.
Despite these efforts, though, Congress hasn't passed health IT legislation during the last two years and funding has been scant. A report released January 18 by the California HealthCare Foundation questions the effectiveness of the Nationwide Health Information Network initiative. CHF calls the goal "worthy," but "impractical" and says it "cannot be implemented."
CHF makes sure to point out that it believes the president's goal of health IT adoption by 2014 is still possible, and has been successful in laying the foundation for health IT and electronic health record adoption. "Yet, it cannot be said that the nation is substantially closer to a ubiquitous, interconnected, interoperable HIT system now than when the president called for action in April 2004," the report says.
So, what do you, a Quality Leader, think? Are we any closer to having electronic health records connect our doctors' offices, hospitals and clinics? Will we see a day where we'll know everything about a patient's medical history the second they walk in the door? If we do, will it improve the quality of American healthcare, as the president proclaimed during his 2004 speech? Will these efforts be interrupted by the change in power that our country will see this time next year?
It remains to be seen who will lead us to the year 2014, or the commitment that leader will have to seeing the health IT initiative through. I'm interested to hear what you think about our health IT progress and whether technology is truly the solution to improving quality and solving America's healthcare problems.