High Reliability Organizing conference, March 2014 (ad hoc slides)

6,922 views
6,868 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
6,922
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
13
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

High Reliability Organizing conference, March 2014 (ad hoc slides)

  1. 1. “e-Patient Dave” deBronkart Twitter: @ePatientDave Patients are the ultimate stakeholder and the ultimate “sensor” Ad hoc presentation at High Reliability Organizing conference breakout session on engaging patients in HRO March 30, 2014 facebook.com/ePatientDave LinkedIn.com/in/ePatientDave dave@epatientdave.com
  2. 2. This is an ad hoc set of slides assembled during an interactive breakout session “Engaging patients in HRO” at the High Reliability Organizing conference Fort Worth,TX March 30, 2014
  3. 3. Preface: Background info on HRO and on my view of medicine for people who weren’t there
  4. 4. My primary physician Dr. Danny Sands and I are among this society’s 12 founders. Note how he arranges that we can both see the computer.
  5. 5. Society for Participatory Medicine www.ParticipatoryMedicine.org “Participatory Medicine is a movement in which networked patients shift from being mere passengers to responsible drivers of their health, and in which providers encourage and value them as full partners.”
  6. 6. About HRO: Wikipedia says http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_reliability_organization “A High Reliability Organization (HRO) is an organization that has succeeded in avoiding catastrophes in an environment where normal accidents can be expected due to risk factors and complexity.” Avoiding catastrophes in healthcare is obviously valuable to patients but few healthcare organizations and virtually no patients know about HRO.
  7. 7. This session was about how we might start involving patients in HRO ... starting with teaching them what it is.
  8. 8. These slides aren’t for a speech with a particular flow – they’re just a set of topics for that moment.
  9. 9. Foundation principle: There have been real changes in the establishment’s view of the value of the patient’s perspective
  10. 10. Institute of Medicine – Sept 2012 Major New Report:“Best Care at Lower Cost”
  11. 11. Yes, the IOM itself says e-patients are an essential part of tomorrow’s healthcare. Patient-Clinician Partnerships Engaged, empowered patients— A learning health care system is anchored on patient needs and perspectives and promotes the inclusion of patients, families, and other caregivers as vital members of the continuously learning care team.
  12. 12. Topic 1: Who gets to say what value is? (In all other quality fields, quality is defined by the ultimate consumer. This is typically not done in healthcare, which I think is a mistake.)
  13. 13. If the microscope’s happy but the patient’s not, has care been achieved? Has optimal care?? Was the money well spent for customer value?
  14. 14. Dutch IVF program had an insane idea •  Give patient couples a wiki, and six months to talk amongst them- selves.The promise: •  “We’ll give you anything you decide – your top ten choices. Unedited.”
  15. 15. Top things IVF patients asked for •  I want insurers to reimburse six attempts.  •  I want insurance companies to only count it as an attempt if the embryo gets started.  •  I want empathy from my doctor, not just technical or financial information.  •  I want separate waiting rooms for families who’ve conceived •  I want more time to make an appointment, even in the evening. 
  16. 16. Topic 1a: In the patient’s view, success is achievement
  17. 17. Compliance (Whose goal is it, anyway?) Achievement!
  18. 18. Topic 2: A key cultural block to medicine accepting patient voices is the belief that patients can’t know anything important. (Because medicine really is hard)
  19. 19. But the internet has caused real changes in pathways for arrival of reliable information
  20. 20. Web 2.0: “When the web began to harness the intelligence of its users.” – Tim O’Reilly
  21. 21. “Liquidity” transforms what’s possible because it alters the availability of a vital resource.
  22. 22. Not Liquid Liquid •  Moving it takes effort •  Slow and predictable •  Unexplained arrivals are suspicious •  Frictionless – controlling the flow takes effort •  Fast and unpredictable •  “Tracks” everywhere, free
  23. 23. Topic 3: In medicine, unreliable information flow causes real challenges in data quality and performance
  24. 24. In this area, activated / engaged patients and families can make a major contribution to HRO’s key principle of “situational awareness”
  25. 25. VA’sVeterans eHealth University, 2012 – audience response: Have you looked in your medical record? Do you know if it has mistakes?
  26. 26. Pre-op:“At least you won’t be lopsided.” “What do you mean?” “You’re getting a bilateral mastectomy.” “No I’m not!” “That’s what came to us on this paper.”
  27. 27. “Now I know why docs don’t give you scan data. I see theVirgin Mary, Jimmy Hoffa, several forks, and Saddam’s yellowcake hiding in my guts.” “And this CT scan makes my butt look big.” @Xeni Live tweeting, 12-18-2011
  28. 28. “So I figure out how to open my bone scan data. I look.” “What the...” “What’s that ****-shaped ghost-shadow thing— it looks like I have a penis!” “I call a hacker pal.‘That, Xeni, is a ****.’” “I look at metadata more carefully. THEY GAVE ME THE WRONG DATA. SOME OTHER DUDE’S SCANS.” @Xeni Next day: 12-19-2011
  29. 29. Topic 4: For patients to be partners in high reliability, they need access to the information
  30. 30. “How can patients participate if they can’t see what I see?” – Dr.Danny Sands
  31. 31. Cultural obstacle to patient access to the medical record: “Patients will flood us with time-wasting questions.”
  32. 32. Evidence: The OpenNotes study MyOpenNotes.org Patients were allowed to log in and see their doctors’ unedited visit notes (published Fall of 2012)
  33. 33. •  99% of patients wanted to continue •  17-26% of docs preferred not to… – But when given the chance to stop, none did •  85-89% of patients said availability of

×