An article in The New York Times by Steve Lohr published March 5, 2012 reports on a study using existing data that concluded that availability of digital records may not cut health costs. Someone expressed doubt in the findings because they were based on correlations in existing data rather than a controlled test intended to test the hypothesis regarding electronic records and costs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/business/digital-records-may-not-cut-health-costs-study-cautions.html?_r=1
In my opinion, not every study requires a method like that of a clinical trial and it is both valid and cost-effective to make use of existing data in responsible ways. Correlation certainly does not prove causality, of course. But I believe the discovery of interesting correlations resulting from hypothesis-based research can be worthy of the attention of professionals. I am not advocating for just mindlessly searching available data for any possible relationship among variables and then pretending to have completed disciplined research.
It is reasonable to anticipate that computerized medical offices have the potential to both save money (by reducing the need for repetition of tests already taken) and to spend additional money as the availability of data stored in electronic records drives the propensity of physicians and patients to want still more data. The new iPad 3 with its high resolution screen is likely to push the, "let's get more images" propensity further. Medical providers want to do what is possible and the availability of higher-quality data easily accessible extends what is possible.
Friday, March 9, 2012
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Using multimedia in personalized health education
In the following TEDMED video Alexander Tsiaras, Founder of The Visual MD, discusses and demonstrates how multimedia can be used to make a patient's lab report come alive to the patient in ways that plain text cannot.
The leadership challenges of transformation
Dr. Ricardo Azziz, President of Georgia Health Sciences University (GHSU) and CEO of Georgia Health Sciences Health System, has made a blog post dated February 4, 2012 regarding the consolidation of GHSU and Augusta State University.
http://azziz.georgiahealth.edu/archives/406
The decision by the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia will surely test the leadership of both those at Augusta State University and Georgia Health Sciences University. Twenty-five years from now I doubt anyone will credit or fault the Regents' decision based on levels of spending for higher education in Georgia. The consolidations will be judged by whether or not campus administrators and others found synergies in new realities.
From what I can observe as a student the leaders of both insitutions are accepting the new reality as opportunity. I think Dr. Azziz' blog post sets the right tone. He and others worked very hard to implement the institutional name change of GHSU to emphasize the mission of the historic institution. Now he is accepting the leadership challenge of adapting his vision to the new opportunity. The entire field of higher education in the United States is in transition and the need for adaptive leadership is everywhere. I appreciate Dr. Azziz for his leadership and his willingness to share his concerns and hopes through his blog and by other means. This is not just about the metropolitan Augusta area. The implications of this particular decision by the Regents regard the entire state of Georgia and beyond because of the scope of medical education and patient services provided by Georgia Health Sciences University and Georgia Health Sciences Health System.
http://azziz.georgiahealth.edu/archives/406
The decision by the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia will surely test the leadership of both those at Augusta State University and Georgia Health Sciences University. Twenty-five years from now I doubt anyone will credit or fault the Regents' decision based on levels of spending for higher education in Georgia. The consolidations will be judged by whether or not campus administrators and others found synergies in new realities.
From what I can observe as a student the leaders of both insitutions are accepting the new reality as opportunity. I think Dr. Azziz' blog post sets the right tone. He and others worked very hard to implement the institutional name change of GHSU to emphasize the mission of the historic institution. Now he is accepting the leadership challenge of adapting his vision to the new opportunity. The entire field of higher education in the United States is in transition and the need for adaptive leadership is everywhere. I appreciate Dr. Azziz for his leadership and his willingness to share his concerns and hopes through his blog and by other means. This is not just about the metropolitan Augusta area. The implications of this particular decision by the Regents regard the entire state of Georgia and beyond because of the scope of medical education and patient services provided by Georgia Health Sciences University and Georgia Health Sciences Health System.
Friday, January 20, 2012
Nanotechnology to the rescue?
Ray Kurzweil offers an exciting vision of the future and we learn to engineer alternative biological structures at the molecular level. Think how "positively disruptive" such abilities may be to our existing medical care systems.
The promise and challenges or more personalized medical interventions
In this video Ger Brophy highlights exciting opportunities to improve medical care for individuals and possibly reduce aggregate costs. Success will require a combination of advancements in medical knowledge and advancements in information technologies.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Friday, January 13, 2012
Merger of GHSU and Augusta State University in Georgia
It was recently reported in The New York Times that several pairs of colleges and universities in the University System of Georgia are being merged, including Georgia Health Sciences University (GHSU) and Augusta State University (ASU).
http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/11/georgia-university-merge/
I earned the MBA at Augusta State University years ago and am presently a student in the Master of Health Informatics degree program at GHSU. I think two valid reasons to merge institutions are the benefits of synergy and the possible savings of money. Higher education is costly and the desire to reduce costs is understandable. My guess is that the motivation of the Regents for this merger is primarily based upon an anticipation of cost savings. Synergy can be achieved through shared services and cooperation among institutions.
It seems to me that mergers are more likely to be successful if the missions of two institutions are similar. Given that educational services are increasingly being delivered virtually (online), perhaps decisions about mergers should be based upon mission statements rather than geography. And, in any case, I wonder about the hope for cost savings. The resulting complexity of merged institutions may in fact lead to more costly operations. If institutions with different missions are merged, costs may actually increase while the focus of the institutions may be diffused.
In my experiences, both Augusta State University and Georgia Health Sciences University are good and valuable institutions. ASU is more a general-purpose state university, offering a wide variety of kinds of degrees. Augusta, Georgia is certainly large enough to need and merit such an institution. GHSU is, of course, focused on medicine and the administration of health care institutions. There are a number of valuable state universities in the Georgia system similar in mission to ASU. GHSU is a more specialized institution and is already complex in its administrative structures. There is going to be a period of adjustments and transitions resulting from the merger. I wonder if in the short term the quality of health care delivery in the state of Georgia and beyond may be affected while attention is diverted to some degree from mission to adjustment at both existing institutions.
In the long run, is the ASU campus going to become medically oriented throughout its existing degree programs and research? Is GHSU going to become less focused on medicine and healthcare administration? Or will the two institutions each remain pretty much as they are but operate under a single (highly stretched) administration? For starters, there is going to be a struggle to decide who who stays and who leaves among the administrative ranks. And what will the new entity be named? Will selected programs be merged at the college and departmental levels? GHSU just went through the process of changing its name from the former name, "Medical College of Georgia." The new name is intended to emphasize the mission and focus of the University. As a citizen of Georgia my major immediate concern regarding this merger is the continued quality of medical education and the continued quality of medical care. I wonder if in fact any cost savings will be realized by this merger and if the possible synergies might have be realized through the sharing of services rather than merger.
http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/11/georgia-university-merge/
I earned the MBA at Augusta State University years ago and am presently a student in the Master of Health Informatics degree program at GHSU. I think two valid reasons to merge institutions are the benefits of synergy and the possible savings of money. Higher education is costly and the desire to reduce costs is understandable. My guess is that the motivation of the Regents for this merger is primarily based upon an anticipation of cost savings. Synergy can be achieved through shared services and cooperation among institutions.
It seems to me that mergers are more likely to be successful if the missions of two institutions are similar. Given that educational services are increasingly being delivered virtually (online), perhaps decisions about mergers should be based upon mission statements rather than geography. And, in any case, I wonder about the hope for cost savings. The resulting complexity of merged institutions may in fact lead to more costly operations. If institutions with different missions are merged, costs may actually increase while the focus of the institutions may be diffused.
In my experiences, both Augusta State University and Georgia Health Sciences University are good and valuable institutions. ASU is more a general-purpose state university, offering a wide variety of kinds of degrees. Augusta, Georgia is certainly large enough to need and merit such an institution. GHSU is, of course, focused on medicine and the administration of health care institutions. There are a number of valuable state universities in the Georgia system similar in mission to ASU. GHSU is a more specialized institution and is already complex in its administrative structures. There is going to be a period of adjustments and transitions resulting from the merger. I wonder if in the short term the quality of health care delivery in the state of Georgia and beyond may be affected while attention is diverted to some degree from mission to adjustment at both existing institutions.
In the long run, is the ASU campus going to become medically oriented throughout its existing degree programs and research? Is GHSU going to become less focused on medicine and healthcare administration? Or will the two institutions each remain pretty much as they are but operate under a single (highly stretched) administration? For starters, there is going to be a struggle to decide who who stays and who leaves among the administrative ranks. And what will the new entity be named? Will selected programs be merged at the college and departmental levels? GHSU just went through the process of changing its name from the former name, "Medical College of Georgia." The new name is intended to emphasize the mission and focus of the University. As a citizen of Georgia my major immediate concern regarding this merger is the continued quality of medical education and the continued quality of medical care. I wonder if in fact any cost savings will be realized by this merger and if the possible synergies might have be realized through the sharing of services rather than merger.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)