Thanks to Tim Churches for doing a great analysis of this issue and then
following it up with real world testing and a report on his results.
These things (see Tim Flewelling's article reference as well) can be
very important if you have information that is very private and you want
to keep it to yourself.

In the real world though my medical record needs to be accessed fairly
often when I'm not there.  One example is when lab test results come
back to the ordering physician.  These results could sit and wait in an
electronic holding bin until I come back in with my record in hand but
they are relatively useless from a clinical standpoint without the
context of the complete (or significant parts) medical record.  So if I
carry it around with me I may have to come in to see if the doctor needs
to see me again......There might be a workflow issue or two with this
scenario. <g>

I still contend that my primary health record should be at my primary
care provider's location where ancillary data can be pushed into it.  Be
this a radiology report, lab report, hospital discharge letter or
cardiologist results.  Using this approach there is no need for huge
MPI's (that invariably contain errors) and there are no socio-political
concerns about unique patient identifiers and their abuse. 

At any one point in time I have a unique patient identifier. Because my
records are on file in Dr. Smith's office on Broadway in MyTown and the
file number is 12345 I can have any pertinent information sent to my
record.  When I decide to switch to Dr. Jones on Main Street in
AnotherTown I can do so and still have a unique patient (record)
identifier.....just not the same one I had before. 

Cheers,
Tim



Reply via email to