This was the question at the Great Debate - at the eHealth Conference here in Quebec City! As mentioned in my previous post, I was invited to debate with three other panelists (all physicians) about the pros and cons of this question.
I must say that it turned out to be a very good discussion on many of the topics that we all need to address. At first, the question seemed very simplistic and even paternalistic in the sense that patients may not have the maturity to access information and therby effectively weigh all of the data and implications. I was even afraid that somehow the question could get very twisted and not even discuss the basic points. But all my worries were for naught!
Before the debate even started, the question was posed and the audience was asked to vote (approximately 1400 conference attendees). Very surprisingly, the vote pro was almost unanimous! I thought that we have won the debate already - as long as I do not not screw it up! It raises the question though in that if everyone agrees then why don't we have that now!
Of course, for the pro side, the many points have been listed here and under the mandate of Patient Destiny itself. But I wanted to emphasize that accessing the e-record is not the end game - but just the start! We need to educate and transform ALL of the healthcare system so that they expect patients to become active decision makers re issues of the health.
Only then can the patient really start to spread their wings and explore all of the potential that full empowerment will provide. The "end game" is patient empowerment! But we do need info to get there.
On the con side, there was a lot of mixed messages and potential hazards that were raised. For example, the discussion for a while was on whether the e-record should be interactive or just like some other webpage with different read-only information. Of course, we are debating bigger issues. They also raised the point about patients creating more work for doctors because they will just have more questions - and will lead to NO change in behaviour!
That is the result we all want - changing behavior which leads to improved health outcomes.
I closed my arguments with the need for funded research around what patients really want and how we design systems to do just that. And, in the end, does that make the patient better ... or just the system more aggravated?
In my mind, there is never a minute spent poorly if we are all represented and debate new ideas!
Comments