health care

Showing posts with label health care. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health care. Show all posts

Twoctor, Twoctor . . I've Got A Bad Case of Tweeting You

Nedra Weinreich over at Spare Change explores uses for Twitter to improve health care in her post Twitter for Health. Great ideas on how Twitter might be used by those of us in the health care industry.

Thanks to Jen McCabe Gorman for tweeting the recent post.

CMS Stark III Regulations Now Available

Today CMS released the final Stark III physician self-referral rule available on the Physician Self Referral section of the CMS website and will be published in the September 5 Federal Register. 516 pages of light health care regulatory reading for the Labor Day Holiday.

The Phase III Stark Final Rule (CMS-1810-F) is officially titled, "Medicare Program; Physicians' Referrals to Health Care Entities With Which They Have Financial Relationships (Phase III)". The regulations will be effective 90 days after the publication date which is expected to be September 5, 2007. Read the CMS press release.

UPDATE: CMS has also provided an unofficial redline version of the Stark regulations showing the existing regulations and incorporating in the new Stark III changes.

UPDATE (7/5/07): The official version was published in the Federal Register on September 5, 2007. A complete copy of the regulations can be found here. The effective date of Phase III Final Rule is December 4, 2007.

UPDATE (11/11/07): David Harlow reports that certain provisions of Stark III will be delayed for up to a year (December 4, 2008).

Below is a copy of the rule summary and the table of contents directly from the final rule:
Summary: This final rule is the third phase (Phase III) of a final rulemaking amending our regulations regarding the physician self-referral prohibition in section 1877 of the Social Security Act (the Act). Specifically, this rule finalizes, and responds to public comments regarding, the Phase II interim final rule with comment period published on March 26, 2004, which set forth the self-referral prohibition and applicable definitions, interpreted various statutory exceptions to the prohibition, and created additional regulatory exceptions for arrangements that do not pose a risk of program or patient abuse (69 FR 16054).

In general, in response to public comments, in this Phase III final rule, we have reduced the regulatory burden on the health care industry through the interpretation of statutory exceptions and modification of the exceptions that were created using the Secretary’s discretionary authority under section 1877(b)(4) of the Act to promulgate exceptions for financial relationships that pose no risk of program or patient abuse.

I. Background
II. General Comments
A. General
B. Compliance with the Anti-kickback Statute
III. Definitions--§411.351
A. Employee
B. Entity
C. Fair Market Value
D. “Incident to” Services
E. Physician in the Group Practice
F. Radiology and Certain Other Imaging Services and Radiation Therapy
G. Referral
H. Rural Area
IV. Group Practice--§411.352
V. Prohibition on Certain Referrals by Physicians and Limitations on Billing--§411.353
VI. Financial Relationship, Compensation, and Ownership or
Investment Interest--§411.354
A. Ownership
B. Compensation
C. Special Rules on Compensation
VII. General Exceptions to the Referral Prohibition Related
to Both Ownership/Investment and Compensation--
§411.355
A. Physician Services
B. In-office Ancillary Services
C. Services Furnished by an Organization (or Its Contractors or Subcontractors) to Enrollees
D. Reserved
E. Academic Medical Centers
F. Implants Furnished by an Ambulatory Surgical Center
G. EPO and Other Dialysis-related Drugs Furnished in or by an End-Stage Renal Dialysis Facility
H. Preventive Screening Tests, Immunizations, and Vaccines
I. Eyeglasses and Contact Lenses Following Cataract Surgery
J. Intra-family Rural Referrals
VIII. Exceptions to the Referral Prohibition Related to
Ownership or Investment Interests--§411.356
A. Publicly-traded Securities and Mutual Funds
B. Hospitals Located in Puerto Rico
C. Rural Providers
D. Ownership Interest in a Whole Hospital
IX. Exceptions to the Referral Prohibition Related to
Compensation Arrangements--§411.357
A. Rental of Office Space
B. Rental of Equipment
C. Bona Fide Employment Relationships
D. Personal Service Arrangements
E. Physician Recruitment
F. Isolated Transactions
G. Remuneration Unrelated to Designated Health Services
H. Group Practice Arrangements with a Hospital
I. Payments by a Physician
J. Charitable Donations by a Physician
K. Nonmonetary Compensation
L. Fair Market Value Compensation
M. Medical Staff Incidental Benefits
N. Risk-sharing Arrangements
O. Compliance Training
P. Indirect Compensation Arrangements
Q. Referral Services
R. Obstetrical Malpractice Insurance Subsidies
S. Professional Courtesy
T. Retention Payments in Underserved Areas
U. Community-wide Health Information Systems
X. Reporting Requirements--§411.361
XI. Miscellaneous (Other)
XII. Provisions of the Final Rule
XIII. Technical Corrections
XIV. Collection of Information Requirements
XV. Regulatory Impact Analysis
A. Overall Impact
B. Anticipated Effects
C. Alternatives Considered


Comments on the new regulations:

Thanks to the AHLA Stark Law listserve for the tip on the final rule.

FSB: Best Lawyers in America 2011

This past week I received notice that I was again selected by my peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2011 in the field of "Health Care Law".

In all, nine lawyers from Flaherty Sensabaugh Bonasso PLLC were selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2011. Congratulations to my partners, David Givens and Mark Robinson, who were selected for the first time this year in the category of "Medical Malpractice".

Below is a list of all the 2011 FSB honorees:

Best Lawyers is based on an exhaustive peer-review survey in which more than 39,000 leading attorneys cast almost 3.1 million votes on the legal abilities of other lawyers in their practice areas. Corporate Counsel magazine has called Best Lawyers "the most respected referral list of attorneys in practice."

Why We Need A Health Care Revolution

Dr. Val Jones' road to revolution provides her personal perspective on the current state of our health care system and why we all need to work for change.

Don't miss the rest of this week's Grand Rounds hosted at Med Journal Watch.

NYT Looks At Dr. Google and Dr. Microsoft

Today's NYT article, Dr. Google and Dr. Microsoft, takes a look at how Google and Microsoft are focusing efforts on the health care industry and how to improve the traditional health care system by utilizing technology to allow patients greater access and control over their personal health information. Both companies are still in the planning phase and trying to determine what will work and what patients might want, use and need.

The entry of these two tech giants along with a slew of other health-technology companies are likely to cause disruption in the health marketplace traditionally controlled by historic models (physicians, hospitals, insurers, etc.) Whether there will be enough momentum to bring change and whether patients are willing to trust these new models is the question that has yet to be answered.

Interestingly, the article mentions a little more about what Google Health might look like. The Google Health prototype focuses on the health consumer:

The welcome page reads, “At Google, we feel patients should be in charge of their health information, and they should be able to grant their health care providers, family members, or whomever they choose, access to this information. Google Health was developed to meet this need.”

A presentation of screen images from the prototype — which two people who received it showed to a reporter — then has 17 other Web pages including a “health profile” for medications, conditions and allergies; a personalized “health guide” for suggested treatments, drug interactions and diet and exercise regimens; pages for receiving reminder messages to get prescription refills or visit a doctor; and directories of nearby doctors.

The article also mentions West Virginia native, David Brailer, former Bush administration National Coordinator for Healthcare Information Technology, who now heads up Health Evolution Partners. Note: Yesterday Matthew Holt posted at The Health Care Blog that Dr. Brailer will be joining the list of speakers at the Health 2.0 Conference to be held next month. Mr. Bosworth of Google will also be on the consumer aggregator panel being moderated by another top health care thinker, Jane Sarasohn-Kahn.

UPDATE: Interested in learning more about Google Health? Check out this post by Jeff O'Conner at the Health Care Information System Blog with links to the Clinical Cases and Images Blog with links to screen shots of the prototype.

Also check out what Doc Searls perspective at ProjectVRM Blog.

UPDATE2: Good insightful follow up post, Here comes Google and Microsoft, from Tony over at Hospital Impact. I especially agree with the last two paragraphs:

Of course, all the same old data issues have to be worked out - privacy, malpractice, storage, interoperability, and security . . . Plus, there's a little problem with funding and business model (hopefully we will never see a Google banner ad within our medical record!) . . . Make no mistake about it- this is not a continuation of the Google vs. Microsoft War that's been going on for years. This is Google or [insert brave company name here] against the most powerful force of them all: the healthcare industry status quo.

Viral Health Effort Via Twitter: Fit West Virginia (#FitWV)

Dawn Miller of the Charleston Gazette highlights the ongoing Fit West Virginia (#FitWV) effort ongoing via Twitter in her op-ed piece, West Virginians try to tip scales on obesity.

The idea was born back on West Virginia Day as a result of Jason Keeling asking his blog readers to discuss solutions to West Virginia's problems in a post, West Virginia: Using Social Media for the Mountain State's Betterment. In response, Skip Lineberg of Maple Creative responded with his post, A Fitter West Virginia.

As a result of that "healthy idea seed" being planted a core group of West Virginia tweeters have been regularly posting on Twitter using the hashtag #FitWV. The effort has created a viral movement of West Virginians supporting other West Virginians in making health choices, exercising regularly, etc. Hopefully, this positive discussion is bringing about positive change and support to those participating.

As the country discussed health care reform efforts like #FitWV should be made a part of the equation. As Jordan Shlain, MD says in his recent op-ed over at The Health Care Blog:
. . . Nowhere in this debate is the patient, the consumer, and the citizen: the American! We lack accountability, responsibility and civic sensibility. It is Joe Diabetic that snacks on ice cream, misses appointments and doesn't take his insulin that increases the cost of health care. This diabetic will be admitted to your local ER with diabetic ketoacidosis and have many subsequent hospital admissions at our (read: your) expense, not his. This is a fundamental collective action problem.

Our town square is so big that we can get away with malfeasance to our village (and our country) with no shame. Yet, the forces of economics do not defy gravity and the cost of health care is now affecting all of us. Those of us that are untethered from the reality of cost are driving our health care 'car' into the ground.
. .
If you use Twitter -- please join the effort.

Dawn Miller also provides a link to some great new information from the Centers for Disease Control. The CDC released last month "Recommended Community Strategies and Measurements to Prevent Obesity in the United States."

Ms. Miller writes:

The CDC did all the research and evaluation work, so individual communities don't have to. They assembled a group of people with experience in urban planning, nutrition, physical activity, obesity prevention and local government. The group reviewed a couple years' worth of research, evaluated various tactics and settled on 24 recommendations. For each one, the CDC summarizes the evidence behind it and suggests ways to measure progress. Communities should:

1. Make healthier food and drinks available in public places. Schools are key, but think also of after-school programs, child care centers, parks, playgrounds, swimming pools, city and county buildings, prisons and juvenile detention centers.

2. Make healthier food more affordable in those public venues. Lower prices, provide discount coupons or offer vouchers for healthy choices.

3. Improve the availability of full-service grocery stores in underserved areas. One study of 10,000 people showed that black residents in neighborhoods with at least one supermarket were more likely to consume the recommended amount of fruits and vegetables than those in neighborhoods without supermarkets. Residents consumed 32 percent more fruits and vegetables for each additional supermarket in their census tract.

More supermarkets also raised real estate values, economic activity and employment and lowered food prices.

4. Provide incentives to food retailers -- supermarkets, convenience stores, corner stores, street vendors -- to locate in underserved areas or to offer healthier food and drinks. Incentives can be tax benefits and discounts, loans, loan guarantees, start-up grants, investment grants for improved refrigeration, supportive zoning and technical assistance.

5. Make it easier to buy foods from farms.

6. Provide incentives for the production, distribution and procurement of foods from local farms.

Did you know that the United States does not produce enough fruits, vegetables and whole grains for every American to eat the recommended amount of these foods? Dispersing agricultural production throughout the country would increase the amount of available produce, improve economic development and contribute to environmental sustainability.

7. Restrict availability of less healthy foods and drinks in public places.

8. Offer smaller portion options in public places.

9. Limit advertisements of less healthy foods and drinks.

10. Discourage people from drinking sugar-sweetened beverages.

11. Support breastfeeding, which appears to provide some protection from obesity later in life.

12. Require physical education in schools.

13. Increase the amount of physical activity in school PE programs. Modify games so that more students are moving at all times, or switch to activities in which all students stay active. Improving phys ed improves aerobic fitness among students.

14. Increase opportunities for extracurricular physical activity.

15. Reduce screen time in public settings. TV and computer time displaces physical activity, lowers metabolism, increases snacking and exposes children to marketing of fattening foods.

16. Improve access to outdoor recreational facilities, such as parks, green spaces, outdoor sports fields, walking and biking trails, public pools and community playgrounds. Access also depends on how close such places are to homes and schools, cost and hours of operation.

17. Support bicycling. Create bike lanes, shared-use paths and routes on existing and new roads. Provide bike racks near commercial areas. Improving bicycling infrastructure can increase how often people bike for utilitarian purposes, such as going to work and school or running errands.

18. Support walking. Build sidewalks, footpaths, walking trails and pedestrian crossings. Improve street lighting, make crossings safer, use traffic calming approaches. Walking is a regular activity of moderate intensity that a large number of people can do.

19. Locate schools within easy walking distance of residential areas.

20. Improve access to public transportation to increase biking and walking to and from transit points.

21. Zone for mixed-use development, including residential, commercial, institutional and other uses. This cuts the distance between home and shopping, for example, and encourages people to make more trips by foot or bike.

22. Enhance personal safety in areas where people are or could be physically active.

23. Enhance traffic safety in areas where people are or could be physically active.

24. Participate in community coalitions or partnerships.

AHLA Public Interest Committee Publishes Stark Law White Paper

The American Health Lawyers Association's Public Interest Committee recently published a new white paper on on the federal self-referral law also known as the "Stark Law" which looks at and considers what, if any, changes to the Stark Law might be beneficial under the current health care system and the proposed reform efforts.


The white paper is entitled, A Public Policy Discussion: Taking the Measure of the Stark Law. The white paper was written as a result of the Committee's Convener on Stark Law, held in Washington, DC on April 24 and June 30, 2009.

Technology: Then and Now

The discussion about health care reform has been front and center lately. Along with the debate comes the discussion and questions about the role technology will (should) play in the reform efforts. I was reminded of a photo I found a few months ago while I was home visiting my dad and looking through some old photo albums with him. 

Although the technology may have changed some from 1978 to 2008 - human nature hasn't really changed that much. Reforming the health care system involves more than implementing technology. Health information technology will not save the system, make health care cheaper or better without changes to the underlying structure of the system of health that we have built. If we continue our health care system with the fundamental flaws that exist without changing the human/process side - adding technology won't help.

Below is a photo of me from Christmas 1978 with the Atari 2600. The second photo of my son with the Nintendo Wii in 2008. Has much change in 30 years? 


YouTube Debate: WV's Mike Sharley's YouTube Video on Health Care

Great to see my law school classmate, Mike Sharley, asking the Democratic candidates at the YouTube debate about health care. Thanks to Larry Messina at Lincoln Walks At Midnight for the tip on the video. You can also get Hoppy's take.

Mike is an amazing individual with great creativity.

Support the Declaration of Health Data Rights: #MyHealthData

The Declaration of Health Data Rights collaborative effort was announced this week by setting forth a simple, straightforward framework for health consumers right to their personal health information.

The social media driven initiative has grown support throughout the week. The effort is being endorsed and supported by a variety of companies/organizations and bloggers. The traditional media has also covered the initiative, including the NYT, "A Push for the Wired Patient's Bill of Rights," Boston Globe, "Health data rights declaration gets push,"and the Huffington Post, "Release 0.9 HealthDataRights Beta Version."

This evening I formally endorsed the declaration and statement of rights (Endorser #793). Read more about the initiave and consider supporting the effort at HealthDataRights.org. You can also follow the discussion on the declaration via twitter at the tag #myhealthdata.

The rights set forth in the declaration are largely supported by existing state and federal law, including changes to be implemented under the new HITECH provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The declaration serves as a simplified and concise statement of rights that helps to alert and engage patients of the role they need to play as better health consumers. Engaged health consumers play a key role in creating the needed change and improvement in our health care delivery system.


A Declaration of Health Data Rights

In an era when technology allows personal health information to be more easily stored, updated, accessed and exchanged, the following rights should be self-evident and inalienable. We the people:
  • Have the right to our own health data
  • Have the right to know the source of each health data element
  • Have the right to take possession of a complete copy of our individual health data, without delay, at minimal or no cost; if data exist in computable form, they must be made available in that form
  • Have the right to share our health data with others as we see fit
These principles express basic human rights as well as essential elements of health care that is participatory, appropriate and in the interests of each patient. No law or policy should abridge these rights.

WVHCA Board Approves Modified Cardiac Catheterization Standards

Yesterday, the West Virginia Health Care Authority Board approved the changes to the Certificate of Need Standards for Cardiac Catheterization. The approved modification will now be delivered to Governor Manchin for review and approval.

Eric Eyre of the Charleston Gazette covers the story today in his article, Smaller hospitals get OK to offer heart procedures.

The new Standards will not go into effect until approved by the Governor. The current Cardiac Catheterization Standards were last updated and approved by the Governor on May 3, 2007.

For more on the process of modifying the standards check out my previous posts.

WVHCA Issues Proposed CON Standards For Bone Marrow Transplantation Service

The West Virginia Health Care Authority has issued new proposed Certificate of Need Standards for Bone Marrow Transplantation Services. For more information go to the "Notice of Public Comment Period".

The proposed CON standards are out for public comment. Public comments can be submitted to the WVHCA no later than July 6, 2007. Notice of the proposed standards were published in today's Charleston Gazette legal advertisement (June 16, 2007).

The proposed standards indicated that West Virginia bone marrow transplants are currently performed exclusively at West Virginia University Hosptials, Inc. The standards state that WVUH "performed 43 bone marrow transplants in 2003, 37 in 2004 and 46 in 2005." The proposed standards indicate that WVUH will be the exclusive provider of bone marrow transplantations service in West Virginia.

healthcare100.com: Global Ranking of Healthcare Blogs

Just noticed a new global ranking service for health care related blogs inspired by Todd Andlik's Power 150. It's called healhtcare100.com. My Health Care Law Blog comes in at 41 out of top 100.

The list includes many of the top health blogs and is well worth scanning if you are interested in what is happening in the world of health and medical blogs. Find out more about edrugsearch.com, the sponsor of the global ranking by checking out their "about us" page. Cary Byrd, founder of the company, gets points for his creation of the global ranking as a way to drive traffic and make others aware of edrugsearch.com. Good classic marketing to bloggers.

Here come the aging boomers . . .

Nick gives us all a little education about what impact baby boomers will have on the health care system. Always great insight (and writing) from Nick.

Add to this what I haved called the Pig in a Python health care effect and it is going to make the delivery of what Nick and his generation expect very difficult. By the time I roll through the system (I'm the tail end of the baby boomers being born in 1966) who knows what the system will look like. Will it be bankrupt? How much will I be paying? Will there be a surplus of of health care workers to take care of me?

Scott Shreeve, MD On Sermo and Knowledge Prostitution

Scott Shreeve, MD one of my favorite Health 2.0 thinkers skeptically examines Sermo's business model of incentive pay for physician opinions and gives us non-physicians a glimpse (with screen shots) of how Sermo works in his post, "Change Agents: Knowledge Prostitution."

I've followed and posted about Sermo's development over the last year. Recently Sermo entered into a strategic affiliation with the AMA mashing up the old school health care industry with Health 2.0.

As these new health care business models evolve they raise all sorts of interesting legal questions for health care lawyers. For example, what impact will the recent outing of flea have on the reluctance of physicians to post recommendations/comments on sites like Sermo? Could specific content posts by physicians ultimately be used against them in future litigation to highlight prior inconsistent statements by the physician on a particular course of action or treatment? As Sermo continues to grow what impact will this online collaboration have on the definition of standard of care? How will Sermo respond when it receives a subpeona for records in a pending health care related class action or medical malpractice action? Just a few of the many questions that come to mind.

David Harlow at HealthBlawg looks at some of the same issues and explores others in his post on "the strange case of the arrogant physician, and related musings on the propriety physician blogging and other online behavior. "

Health 2.0 Unser Generated Healthcare Update Conference - September 20, 2007

Final arrangements for the Health 2.0 - User Generated Healthcare Conference in San Francisco are now available from co-organizer, Matthew Holt of The Health Care Blog. The conference will be held at the Hilton San Francisco on September 20, 2007.

I had the pleasure of participating on a panel discussion with Matthew at the Healthcare Blogging Summit 2007 and am a regular reader of his health blog. He and co-organizer, Indu Subaiya, MD, MBA have put together an outstanding and comprehensive list of speakers for the event. Check out the summary and agenda.

Anyone interested in the emerging Health 2.0 movement and its impact on health care delivery should not miss the event. I've already calendared the date and plan to attend.

The Flea Flicker: Risks of (anonymous) Medical Blogging

Kevin M.D. has the full roundup from the blogosphere of the unmasking of Flea (cached version) at his malpractice trial. Today's Boston Globe reports more of the details. More details courtesy of New York Personal Injury Law Blog.

I periodically ran across Flea's posts over the last year and was surprised a few months ago when I started to notice his posts discussed his ongoing malpractice case, including discussions with his defense counsel. My initial reaction -- does his defense counsel know about his blogging. The answer was no. At the time, like Eric Turkewitz I concluded that there was a high risk (if uncovered by the plaintiffs attorney) that his blogging publicly would potentially waive attorney client privilege. Eric also provides some great links of previous posts about Flea.

This situation highlights the potential risk faced by medical bloggers and a reason why lawyers need to better understand the blogosphere and the impact of online social networking on themselves and their clients. The fall out from this case will be interesting to watch.

UPDATE (6/4/07): More today from Eric Turkewitz and how plaintiff's counsel uncovered that Flea was Dr. Lindeman in his post, "Deconstructing the Trial - Part 1." A comment to the post raises the most important lessons for physicians or other bloggers who find themselves facing litigation. The comment reads:
This is a great example of why it's important to tell your lawyer about things like this. If Flea's lawyers had gone through all the posts on his blog, they would undoubtedly have prepared him for this question. These kinds of prior statements are neither unusual nor damning - you just have to know how to handle them.
In fact I'll say it again - TELL YOUR LAWYER ABOUT THINGS - whether you are the plaintiff or defendant. Usually its embarrassing or uncomfortable things that clients don't want to tell you and these things can significantly impact the outcome of litigation. It's these hidden facts or facts that weren't explored far enough (or understood) by defense counsel that can come back and bite. I suspect that defense counsel has a new appreciation for blog content.

Deconstructing the Trial of Flea - Part 2 is now also available where Mr. Turkewitz provides some insight into whether or not the existence of Flea's blog was a factor in settlement of the case.

Tip to Kevin M.D. for highlighting today's post by Mr. Turkewitz.

EWeek.com Article: Google and Health Care

Today I noticed a little more traffic to my blog with much of it coming from www.eweek.com. As a result of a little searching I found an article (Google Aims to Extend Data Mantra into Health Care) quoting from one of my previous post (What Google Health Might Look Like).

My previous post on Google Health was a a reaction and response to a post at the Google Blog by Adam Bosworth, Google's VP, asking to hear from others about how you and I as patients know whether we are getting the best care. The post was not just about "concerns over what could be lost in the digitizing of medical information" (as quoted in the article) but rather an overall examination of what Google Health and some of the other Health 2.0 type companies may bring to bear on our traditional health information system and how this may ultimately impact the quality of health care we receive.

X PRIZE: $10M Incentive to Innovate In Health Care (Reform)

Scott Shreeve, MD, Senior Health Advisor at the X PRIZE Foundation sent out a call last week to all health care bloggers to participate in a blog rally to promote the idea and effort behind the Healthcare X PRIZE competition. Below is a message from Dr. Sheeve being post around the blogosphere today. Please spread the word via your blog, Facebook, Twitter or the old fashion way -- telling someone face to face.

We are entering an unprecedented season of change for the United States health care system. Americans are united by their desire to fundamentally reform our current system into one that delivers on the promise of freedom, equity, and best outcomes for best value. In this season of reform, we will see all kinds of ideas presented from all across the political spectrum. Many of these ideas will be prescriptive, and don’t harness the power of innovation to create the dramatic breakthroughs required to create a next generation health system.

We believe there is a better way.

This belief is founded in the idea that aligned incentives can be a powerful way to spur innovation and seek breakthrough ideas from the most unlikely sources. Many of the reform ideas being put forward may not include some of the best thinking, the collective experience, and the most meaningful ways to truly implement change. To address this issue, the X PRIZE Foundation, along with WellPoint Inc. and WellPoint Foundation as sponsor, has introduced a $10M prize for health care innovators to implement a new model of health. The focus of the prize is to increase health care value by 50% in a 10,000 person community over a three year period.

The Healthcare X PRIZE team has released an Initial Prize Design and is actively seeking public comment. We are hoping, and encouraging everyone at every opportunity, to engage in this effort to help design a system of care that can produce dramatic breakthroughs at both an individual vitality and community health level.

Here is your opportunity to contribute:
  1. Download the Initial Prize Design
  2. Share you comments regarding the prize concept, the measurement framework, and the likelihood of this prize to impact health and health care reform.
  3. Share the Initial Prize Design document with as many of your health, innovation, design, technology, academic, business, political, and patient friends as you can to provide an opportunity for their participation
We hope this blog rally amplifyies our efforts to solicit feedback from every source possible as we understand that innovation does not always have a corporate address. We hope your engagement starts a viral movement of interest driven by individual people who realize their voice can and must be included. Let’s ensure that all of us - and the people we love - can have a health system that aligns health finance, care delivery, and individual incentives in a way that optimizes individual vitality and community health. Together, we can ensure the best ideas are able to come forward in a transparent competition designed to accelerate health innovation. We look forward to your participation.

This post was written by Scott Shreeve, MD in behalf of the X PRIZE Foundation.
Special thanks to Paul Levy for both demonstrating the value of collaborative effort and suggesting we utilize a blog rally for this crowdsourcing effort.

Better Understanding of Key Health Information Technology Terms

On April 28, 2008, the National Alliance for Health Information Technology released its Report, "Defining Key Health Information Technology Terms," to the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.

The report is an effort to get everyone working in health information technology to have a common understanding of and differences between EMRs, EHRs, PHRs, HIEs, HIOs and RHIOs. If you don't know what each of these are or are interested in better understanding these key health tech terms check out the report.

An article by Health Data Management indicates that the Report will be "presented on June 3 to the American Health Information Community, a Department of Health and Human Services advisory body, for final approval."