Posted on 06/20/2012 8:10:04 AM PDT by shove_it
Lured by huge incentives, doctors are rushing to digitize your medical files. The move, though, might have some nasty side effects for patients.
Few health care trends have gotten as much press of late as the mad rush into electronic health records. Physicians, driven by the promise of better care, cost savings and nearly $23 billion in new federal incentive payments, are racing to turn their scribbled medical records into digital files. Thirty-five percent of hospitals now use such systems, more than double the share two years ago, according to U.S. government figures. But for all the hype about electronic records, little attention has been paid to what some say is a serious weak spot: When those sensitive bits and bytes fall into the wrong hands, it's often patients who feel the pain.
Since 2009, there have been more than 420 security breaches involving the records of some 19 million patients, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office for Civil Rights. And such breaches are on the rise. A December 2011 report by the Ponemon Institute, a security-research firm, found that the frequency of data losses and thefts among health care organizations increased 32 percent over the previous year.
With studies so far focused nearly exclusively on the impact of such losses on health care providers, the cost to consumers has been largely ignored -- a fact some experts find mind-boggling. "There's more financial damage that can be created from your health insurance information than a credit card number," says Rick Kam, president of ID Experts, a data-privacy consulting firm. A medical identity thief, for example, might use a stolen insurance card to submit false claims in order to get cash back -- which can cause the real insurance holder to be saddled with a higher insurance premium, or even left on the hook for fraudulent medical bills. And unlike the case with credit cards, says Harry Rhodes, director of practice leadership for the American Health Information Management Association, there are no industry measures to limit consumer liability in medical-record fraud. Of still greater concern are the potential health consequences: If a thief uses stolen data to obtain medical care for himself, his health information is automatically merged into the electronic file, Rhodes says. The result could be grave to the original patient if he or she has a serious medication allergy or if a new medical diagnosis suddenly changes a care regimen.
Given the stakes, experts like Deven McGraw, director of the Health Privacy Project at the Center for Democracy & Technology in Washington, D.C., advise consumers to guard their health insurance cards the way they would their credit cards and to carefully review their statements of insurance benefits. Beyond that, pros say, patients should ask their doctors how sensitive data is being protected. After all, says Larry Ponemon, chairman of the Ponemon Institute, "Patients' lives depend on it."
Giving up liberty for convenience. I’ll be glad to walk away from those who would give Big Brother all their liberties and freedoms just so they don’t have to fill out a couple forms. This generation of health care consumers just don’t understand what’s coming. But some of them might deserve it.
But in my and my wife's case we've been seeing one 'Medical Group' of doctors like forever. My file has everything, my entire medical history going back to 1967, and is over an inch thick.
And I can see my Primary Care Dr on 'Tuesday' and my Orthopedic Surgeon in a different office on 'Wednesday' and my file is there. Ditto if I have to go to a specialist that isn't in that one Medical Building and even in a different suburb, like I did for a Numerologist one time.
I don't know how they accomplish that feat and I don't care. But for sure I don't want that file of mine anywhere on the Internet. Not even if it was 'protected' by the NSA (aka: No Such Agency) and stored underground at Area 51.
See, I take one Rx that was initially developed for a particular 'serious medical condition'. But it was later found to be effective for treatment for an entirely different 'none serious' (aka: life threatening) condition. And if that Rx info ever got into the wrong hands like: Schumer, Di-Fi, Bloomberg, Rahm, or HOLDER, I'd be F___ed! (get that hint there?)
'Numerologist' should be Neurologist.
Ok, but do you travel? One car accident out of state and the ER is working with a blank slate if you are unable to speak.
Also, the Rx you are worried about is already linked to you by the Pharmacy where you had it filled at. And, unless you are a 100% cash customers of your Medical Group, then there is an electronic record filed with your insurance company.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.