Med­i­cal home pro­grams ham­pered by com­plex­ity

Modern Healthcare - - COMMENT -

Re­gard­ing the re­cent ar­ti­cle “Re­form Up­date: Med­i­cal-home adop­tion grow­ing; ev­i­dence of ef­fec­tive­ness still elu­sive” (ModernHealth­care.com, Aug. 18), I love th­ese self-serv­ing stud­ies, hun- dreds of thou­sands of dol­lars wasted to come up with noth­ing.

There is noth­ing wrong with the pa­tient-cen­tered med­i­cal-home con­cept. The prob­lem is with the im­ple­men­ta­tion of it. To jus­tify the enor­mous fees as­so­ci­ated with th­ese pro­grams, the de­vel­op­ers of the pro­grams gen­er­ate them with such com­pli­cated fea­tures that the man-hours and at­ten­tion that they re­quire out­shine the prac­ti­cal­ity of the sys­tem.

Doc­tors are against it be­cause it tends to take con­trol of the pa­tient away from them, not to men­tion the enor­mous time and ef­fort it takes to mon­i­tor them. What is needed is a sys­tem that is sim­ple, cost-effective and gives the nec­es­sary core data to the physi­cian to man­age the pa­tient prop­erly.

David Hold Global Tele­health Solutions

Hol­ly­wood, Fla.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.