Search the KHIT Blog

Monday, June 26, 2017

Up next: "Improving Global Health: Focusing on Quality and Safety"

I saw this at THCB and signed up for it. We'll see. It's a nominally free "MOOC" -- though they keep trying to get $99 out of you for a "Certificate upgrade." I already have a health care QI "Cert" from IHC (and had an ASQ CQE Cert for years prior to retiring it). At 71, I'm past the days of needing any "certs" for "career advancement." I'm just interested in the learning. Given the uncertainties of my daughter's illness (she just finished chemo round 4), I just hope I can devote the time to get through the entire course. If they let you buy the certificate later, I may do that. The $99 is no issue.
"We are at a critical inflection point in global health. We have seen improvements in access to care, but struggle to improve human health. A key component of this equation is quality of care.

Improving access to healthcare is only as useful as the quality of care provided. Many agree that quality is important – but what is it? How do we define it? How do we measure it? And most importantly, how might we make it better?

The course is designed for those who care about health and healthcare and wish to learn more about how to measure and improve that care – for themselves, for their institutions, or for their countries. Each session will be interactive and provide concrete tools that students can use. We will empower you to raise questions, propose concrete solutions, and promote change.

We have assembled leading thinkers from around the globe – not only people who are experts – but people with real, hands-on experience running organizations, hospitals, and ministries of health. So join us – whether you are a physician, nurse, or other healthcare provider, if you are a student of medicine, public health, or health policy, or a patient who simply cares about getting good care – this course is for you."


MACRA is a $15 billion boondoggle that the best research shows will neither improve quality nor control costs. Paying doctors for quality (e.g., doing a blood pressure exam) or efficiency may make sense theoretically, but it doesn’t work...

Some of the (interlinked and overlapping) factors I think about, and have blogged on at some recurrent length here:
dx accuracy and precision;
px/tx efficacy;
Process QI;
Organizational culture;
Clinical pedagogy;
Clincal science;
Technologies (e.g., HIT, AI, applied "Omics");
Economics -- business and public policy/legislative realities.

They provide scrolling (and downloadable) text transcripts with the videos.



My next-of-kin caregiver duties have seriously hampered my normal reading pace, but here are a few titles in various stages of completion, to be reported on soon.

Much of the motive here maps to my interest in "Natural Language Processing," and its prospective utility (if any) regarding applied AI in health care.


EHR users have long complained about "vendor lock," the circumstance resulting from the large sunk cost of buying (uh, "licensing") a platform and the lack of data exchange / '"interoperability" between systems. A post over at Naked Capitalism is broadly intriguing in this regard.
US Copyright Office Wimps Out on Right to Repair
Posted on June 27, 2017 by Jerri-Lynn Scofield

By Jerri-Lynn Scofield, who has worked as a securities lawyer and a derivatives trader. She now spends much of her time in Asia and is currently researching a book about textile artisans. She also writes regularly about legal, political economy, and regulatory topics for various consulting clients and publications, as well as scribbles occasional travel pieces for The National.

As more and more devices require software to operate, copyright holders employ a number of measures that thwart an end user’s right to repair a product s/he ostensibly owns.

As the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) recognizes, although in theory one may own a device outright, one’s only allowed to license the software necessary to make the device work properly. The terms of that license may preclude any efforts to tinker with the device, reverse engineer it, or have a third party undertake a repair…
Very interesting post. Including the comments.

BTW, Adrian Gropper, MD has long been an insistent voice for "open source" in Health IT.

Registration Link


More to come...

No comments:

Post a Comment