[Med-privacy] GoogleHealth

[peter marshall]

  Boston.com =09
The Boston Globe
GLOBE EDITORIAL
Better data for better health

July 3, 2008

BLUE CROSS Blue Shield of Massachusetts announced an agreement recently=20=

to give members access to their records via the new Google Health=20
service. This venture is part of a movement to put consumers in charge=20=

of their medical records as the healthcare system edges into the=20
Internet era. It's unclear, however, whether patients want this=20
control. What's more important is getting doctors and hospitals=20
connected into a single system. Blue Cross is doing its part by=20
financing an experiment in three Massachusetts communities.

Google Health, like similar services from Microsoft and other=20
companies, is voluntary. Patients will be able to store and check their=20=

records for accuracy, and if they move to another doctor, allow access=20=

via Google. Google and the other companies have agreed to privacy=20
guidelines, but they are not covered by the federal law that protects=20
health records held by physicians, hospitals or insurance companies.=20
Patients should be wary of this legal void.

The private companies are taking the lead on electronic health records=20=

because of the failure of many US healthcare providers to embrace the=20
Internet. A system should be in place that, subject to patient=20
approval, would speed records from physicians' offices to hospitals or=20=

anyplace a person needs care.

Healthcare providers would know which drugs a patient is taking and=20
what tests have been done. Guided by Internet-based information=20
services, physicians would offer treatment that reflects the latest=20
medical knowledge. All this could be done without compromising patient=20=

privacy. Data-sharing among doctors and hospitals is protected by=20
federal law and, in Massachusetts, state privacy requirements.

Partners HealthCare and a few other regional providers have connected=20
their hospitals with allied physician groups. These networks are=20
isolated and small compared with the need. A recent study in the New=20
England Journal of Medicine found that only 4 percent of US physicians=20=

are linked to a comprehensive system.

In Massachusetts, the most impressive program is the eHealth=20
Collaborative, which has established pilot programs in North Adams and=20=

Newburyport, and is just starting one in Brockton. Blue Cross Blue=20
Shield, with a $50 million, four-year contribution, is the prime source=20=

of support.

In Newburyport, 100 physicians, with 100,000 patients, are hooked into=20=

a network with the Anna Jacques Hospital. In North Adams, 55 physicians=20=

and 40,000 patients are connected to the North Adams Regional Hospital.=20=

Patients must agree in advance that records are shared. The=20
collaborative won't be able to assess the impact for a year or two, but=20=

if computerization in other sectors of the economy is a guide, the=20
system will improve the quality, safety, and affordability of care.

The Blue Cross grant runs out on December 31, when there will still be=20=

much work to be done in the three communities. The state budget=20
agreement reached this week includes $25 million to advance the=20
creation of these systems. The budget doesn't specify who should get=20
the money, but based on its success so far, the eHealth Collaborative=20
deserves state support to identify other communities that would be=20
willing to implement a health records system.

The $25 million won't buy much software or many computers. It will lay=20=

the foundation for a more expensive program requiring a combination of=20=

public and private funds.

Patients in Newburyport and North Adams will be able to access their=20
own electronic records by the end of the summer. Then they can send=20
them on to Google Health or another Internet service if they like.=20
Closer to home, physicians and hospitals will already have the=20
information they need to give them quality care.

=A9 Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company