Does anyone REALLY plan to use a PHR?

Nov. 15, 2011
One of the themes of the meaningful use definition is the drive to provide the patient more access to, or control over, their health information. The 2011 objectives call for the ability for both hospitals and physicians (eligible providers) to provide patients with an electronic copy of their health information, while the 2013 objectives take it a step further requiring access for all patients to a personal health record (PHR) populated in real time with health data.

One of the themes of the meaningful use definition is the drive to provide the patient more access to, or control over, their health information. The 2011 objectives call for the ability for both hospitals and physicians (eligible providers) to provide patients with an electronic copy of their health information, while the 2013 objectives take it a step further requiring access for all patients to a personal health record (PHR) populated in real time with health data.

What is the administration trying to accomplish by this push? Is it more accountability on the part of the patient over their information? If so, what will that accomplish? I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m pretty busy – over the years I’ve taken on more and more tasks that were once performed by others. I am my own travel agent and my own bank teller – but I’m not excited about being my own medical records clerk. True, it took many years for online travel and banking to reach the level of use seen today – but in those examples I could see the upside. I liked to be able to compare prices, and see what seat I could pick on the plane, or what specific features a hotel might have that would appeal to me. In the case of banking, I liked being able to pay my bills without writing out checks, buying stamps and finding a mailbox, or having to race to the bank by 3pm to make a deposit. What do I get if I control my health information? Some value proposition may exist that I’m not aware of, and if not, one will likely emerge – but I just don’t see it yet.

In the meantime, I do see the early requirements around PHR as a distraction from the true priority of health information exchange. Much effort will be required to build local, regional, and national HIEs. The PHR could be a byproduct of a health information exchange – ultimately benefitting from the universal ability to exchange data between disparate care settings. Requiring it up front seems to be putting the horse before the cart – independent of the existence of a value proposition for personal control of the information.

Sponsored Recommendations

How Digital Co-Pilots for patients help navigate care journeys to lower costs, increase profits, and improve patient outcomes

Discover how digital care journey platforms act as 'co-pilots' for patients, improving outcomes and reducing costs, while boosting profitability and patient satisfaction in this...

5 Strategies to Enhance Population Health with the ACG System

Explore five key ACG System features designed to amplify your population health program. Learn how to apply insights for targeted, effective care, improve overall health outcomes...

A 4-step plan for denial prevention

Denial prevention is a top priority in today’s revenue cycle. It’s also one area where most organizations fall behind. The good news? The technology and tactics to prevent denials...

Healthcare Industry Predictions 2024 and Beyond

The next five years are all about mastering generative AI — is the healthcare industry ready?