"Will you hear my voice?": to engage older patients online, listen to them about their lives offline

The scope of health information and health care services available online is rapidly expanding. At the same time, COVID-19 is causing vulnerable elders to reconsider in-person provider visits. In that context, recently published research by Y. Mizrachi et al. examining obstacles to the use of online health services (OHS) among adults age 50 and up takes on new importance. An iconic Israeli song begins, “Will you hear my voice?” (Hebrew Songs. Zemer Nugeh (Hatishmah Koli), 2020). What makes Mizrachi et al.’s findings particularly intriguing, despite several caveats, is the manner in which they demonstrated a commitment to genuinely listen to individual voices. The researchers spoke “openly and bluntly” with interviewees as peers and were rewarded with “specific, well-defined and applicable answers with the potential to be used.” The most striking findings came in candid answers that went beyond the factors intrinsic to the online offerings and addressed important factors in what regular Internet users often refer to as IRL (“in real life”), such as support from family. The necessity of avoiding preconceptions about the most effective manner to engage patients underscores the importance of patient and family advisory councils (PFACs). PFACs, increasingly being adopted by health care organizations globally, provide an ongoing ability to listen and respond to the “patient voice.” Effectively addressing obstacles to older adults’ use of the full range of online health resources will require the involvement not just of health plans and government, but also of voluntary organizations, providers, families and others integral to users’ offline “real lives.” Sustained, focused listening must be a central part of that effort.

Beyond Dr. Google: the evidence on consumer-facing digital tools for diagnosis

Over a third of adults go online to diagnose their health condition. Direct-to-consumer (DTC), interactive, diagnostic apps with information personalization capabilities beyond those of static search engines are rapidly proliferating. While these apps promise faster, more convenient and more accurate information to improve diagnosis, little is known about the state of the evidence on their performance or the methods used to evaluate them. We conducted a scoping review of the peer-reviewed and gray literature for the period January 1, 2014–June 30, 2017. We found that the largest category of evaluations involved symptom checkers that applied algorithms to user-answered questions, followed by sensor-driven apps that applied algorithms to smartphone photos, with a handful of evaluations examining crowdsourcing. The most common clinical areas evaluated were dermatology and general diagnostic and triage advice for a range of conditions. Evaluations were highly variable in methodology and conclusions, with about half describing app characteristics and half examining actual performance. Apps were found to vary widely in functionality, accuracy, safety and effectiveness, although the usefulness of this evidence was limited by a frequent failure to provide results by named individual app. Overall, the current evidence base on DTC, interactive diagnostic apps is sparse in scope, uneven in the information provided and inconclusive with respect to safety and effectiveness, with no studies of clinical risks and benefits involving real-world consumer use. Given that DTC diagnostic apps are rapidly evolving, rigorous and standardized evaluations are essential to inform decisions by clinicians, patients, policymakers and other stakeholders.

Patient-centered care: turning the rhetoric into reality

Although patient-centered care (PCC) was proclaimed a core health system aim in a 2001 Institute of Medicine report, it remains one of the most-used and least-understood terms in healthcare. We interviewed leaders at 15 Medicare accountable care organizations (ACOs) across the country that have been the most successful in putting patient-centeredness into actual practice to develop an operational definition. The ACOs we spoke with had a 3-pronged practical approach of: 1) patients as partners, 2) proactive customer-service orientation, and 3) care coordination with a whole-person approach. We believe this framework can serve as a guide as the healthcare system moves "from volume to value" and a true partnership becomes increasingly critical both to patients and the healthcare system as a whole.

The long wait for medical excellence

In October 1997 the book Demanding Medical Excellence: Doctors and Accountability in the Information Age provided a pathbreaking examination of the quality of American health care. It documented rampant medical error and the absence of evidence-based practice, highlighted the potential of electronic health records (EHRs), endorsed what is now known as value purchasing, and showed how patients could exert more control over their care. Although the book suggested that transformational change was imminent, sixteen years later little has changed in some areas (medical error), while in others (evidence-based medicine and population health) change is only now gaining momentum. The exception is technology, where incentives boosted EHR use and the Internet has made a vast array of information available to patients. Paradigm shifts are traumatic, and only recently has intense financial pressure made greater clinical accountability seem less painful than retaining the tradition of untrammeled autonomy. In hearing rooms and hospital hallways, the policy conversation is changing. This shift, though an unavoidable source of anxiety, nonetheless promises a genuine renewal of American medicine.

Telltale signs of patient-centered diagnosis

A best-selling book from the mid-1980s was entitled, All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten. Some doctors may similarly feel that well-worn epigrams from Hippocrates, Osler and others have told them all they really need to know about patient-centered care. The problem is that aphorisms and action are not one and the same. The workup for patient-centered diagnosis takes work, and there are telltale signs along the way. Effective patient engagement requires training and practice. It means incorporating patient-generated data into the diagnostic process. And it means being sensitive to new economic constraints on patients. Ensuring that diagnostic processes and decisions meet the test of patient-centeredness poses a challenge. The new criteria do not replace the professional obligation of beneficence; rather they add an additional obligation of power sharing. While that is neither simple nor easy, it promises better care for patients, a more satisfying clinical encounter and a better health care system for all.

The road to patient experience of care measurement: lessons from the United States

Patient-centered care has become an increasing priority in the United States and plays a prominent role in recent healthcare reforms. One way the country has managed to advance patient-centered care is through establishment of a family of national patient experience surveys (the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Plans (CAHPS). CAHPS is publicly reported for several types of providers and was recently tied to hospital reimbursement. This is part of a trend over the last two decades that has shifted provider-patient relationships from a traditional paternal approach to customer service and then to clinical partnership. The health care system in Israel, however, is still struggling to overcome barriers to change in this area. While community based biannual patient experience surveys are conducted by the Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute, there is no comprehensive national approach to measuring the patient experience across a broad range of settings. Only recently did the Israeli Ministry of Health take its first steps to include patient experience as a dimension of health care quality.

In its current position, Israel should learn from the U.S. experience with policies promoting patient-centered care, and specifically the impact on clinical services of measuring the patient experience. Looking at what has happened in the United States, we suggest three main lessons. First, there is a need for a set of national patient experience surveys that would be publicly reported and eventually tied to provider reimbursement. Secondly, the national survey tools should be customized to the unique characteristics of Israeli society and draw from recent research on patient-centeredness to include new and important domains such as patient activation and shared decision-making. Finally, newer technological approaches should be explored with the aim of increasing response rates and the timeliness and usefulness of the surveys.

The sea change of the see-through hospital--and how to stay afloat

In the new era of transparency, hospitals need to understand that payers, competitors, and consumers are looking closely at their clinical quality performance. That increased scrutiny promises financial consequences if hospitals fail to live up to their ideals.

Medical bankruptcy: myth versus fact

David Himmelstein and colleagues recently contended that medical problems contribute to 54.5 percent of personal bankruptcies and threaten the solvency of solidly middle-class Americans. They propose comprehensive national health insurance as a solution. A reexamination of their data suggests that medical bills are a contributing factor in just 17 percent of personal bankruptcies and that those affected tend to have incomes closer to poverty level than to middle class. Moreover, for national health insurance to have an impact, it would have to define "medical" expenses in a much broader way than is now typical of either private or government-funded plans.

The silence

Despite several well-crafted Institute of Medicine (IOM) reports, there remains within health care a persistent refusal to confront providers' responsibility for severe quality problems. There is a silence of deed--failing to take corrective actions--and of word--failing to discuss openly the true consequences of that inertia. These silences distort public policy, delay change, and, by leading (albeit inadvertently) to thousands of patient deaths, undermine professionalism. The IOM quality committee, to retain its moral authority, should forgo issuing more reports and instead lead an emergency corrective-action campaign comparable to Flexner's crusade against charlatan medical schools.

Pushing the profession: how the news media turned patient safety into a priority

The problem of patient safety has been repeatedly identified in the medical literature since the mid 1950s, but regular revelations about patient deaths and injuries resulting from treatment have had almost no effect on the actual practice of medicine. Only very recently has the medical profession made a systematic effort to reduce or eliminate the many preventable deaths and injuries that occur in hospitals each year. This review traces the diffusion of innovation in medical error reduction to the public shaming of the profession that occurred as a result of stories that appeared in the news media. The focus is on the USA, but news stories about patient safety are sparking a similar process throughout the western world.

Can purchasers correct the course? New roles, new responsibilities

A health care analyst-writer explains the critical components for the health care purchasing system of tomorrow and lays out an action plan for effectively facing its challenges.

Taking account of quality. Discussion

Another report from the Institute of Medicine in March 2001 has joined a large body of literature documenting serious quality and safety problems. Eight health care leaders discuss ways in which organizations can reduce medical errors and improve patient outcomes.

3 forces for change

For decades, health care has nursed a distrust of comparative clinical data. But what the market wants, it gets. Economics, technology, and the spirit of the times call for computer systems that measure quality.

Hospitals are loath to cite satisfactory level of profit

The healthcare industry likes to talk about the need to earn a reasonable profit, but no one wants to nail down what constitutes a reasonable profit margin for a hospital, says Michael Millenson.