Posts Tagged ‘patient’

Supporting Patient Engagement

January 23rd, 2012

As the patient engagement “movement” grows, there are many health care practitioners and health systems who want to interact differently with patients – whether to improve patient satisfaction scores, obtain pay for performance incentives, meet standards for Patient-Centered Medical Homes or Accountable Care Organizations, or from a heartfelt desire to collaborate to improve outcomes as defined by patients.

The question most ask is “how?”.  “What does patient engagement look like in practice?  What does it look like in my practice?  What specifically do I do?”

Here are some examples (Hospital edition):

At the Institution Level –

  • Hire and empower a Patient Ombudsman to elicit and respond to patient and family questions and concerns
  • Get the administrators out of the office sometimes and take them on Executive Team Rounding to actually meet patients
  • Conduct Patient/Family Surveys and Patient/Family Focus Groups and analyze, display, and use the data
  • Convene Patient/Family Advisory Boards
  • Appoint Patients and Patient family Members on  your Governing Board

At the Health Care Practitioner Level

  • Understand and assess your patients to ascertain their differences in preferences and capacity for engagement (Read Dr. Jerome Groopman’s  and Dr. Pamela Hartzband’s Your Medical Mind)
  • Give your patients and their families permission to partner with you. Voice your willingness to be answer questions, explain things more fully.
  • Ask permission to connect with patients. (It demonstrates respect)
  • Don’t swoop. As workflow permits, time your visits to patients when they are awake and family is present. (At 5:30 am after a restless night in the hospital most patients are not at their most cogent and inquisitive.)
  • Share information.Share with your colleagues to enhance coordination and share with patients to help them ask the right questions and make the right decisions (for them).
  • Start preparing patients for post-discharge self-management as early as possible

Thank you for your support

Defining Patient Engagement

February 1st, 2011

The mad scramble to figure out how to “engage” patients in their healthcare has begun!

Prompted by federal stimulus money for health information technology development and usage, the rising number of patients and caregivers using the internet to question both their care and the healthcare system, unsustainable costs of patients with preventable chronic disease, and new quality measures that grade medical facilities on their “patient-centeredness”; everyone from PR firms to hospital boards are trying to figure out how to engage patients.

1. What does it mean to engage?
According to the Merriam Webster online edition, E-N-G-A-G-E has several different meanings. The 1st of which is “to offer (as one’s word) as security for a debt or cause” – I guess this is how consumer directed healthcare came to mean patients pay a greater share of the cost of their healthcare. The 6th meaning is “to enter into contest or battle with” – this must be what many doctors envision will happen if they allow patients equal footing in healthcare decisionmaking. It is the 5th meaning “to hold the attention of : engross b : to induce to participate” that most intend when they talk about engaging patients in their health, although this too frequently devolves into, listen to all the health information and medical treatment prescriptions we give you and comply.
2. What does meaningful engagement look like?
Properly done, patient engagement in action looks like shared responsibility between patients (and their families if applicable), healthcare practitioners (the entire team – surgeons, physicians, nurses), and healthcare administrators (providers of the infrastructures and the payment models) to co-develop pathways to optimal individual, community and population health. Patient engagement brought to life, means involving patients and caregivers in every step of the process, providing training or financial support if necessary to their participation. Patient engagement is not satisfied by a survey or an annual meeting of an advisory board. Going back to the definition above – patient engagement must “hold the attention of patients” – give us something useful to do? Let us provide solutions to medical error rates, give input on facility design (not just the paint color, but the placement of the outlets in the rooms so I can stay attached to my infusion pump and still get to the bathroom), develop research questions, define what outcomes we find valuable to measure, train staff to be culturally competent – that would hold my attention. As for “induce to participate”, beyond making the connection of action to our own health and well-being, many patients are willing to devote significant time and effort to making the system better for their children, grandchildren, and for future patients.

My question to hospitals and others pushing back on the idea of meaningful patient engagement is this: Why would you reject the help of thousands of individuals positioned in various ways to help you be more successful?

Patients’ Rights come to the Hospital

January 18th, 2011

There is sometimes a mismatch these days between the expectations that empowered patients have and the experiences they encounter in the hospital or other care settings. Great hospitals will recognize that respecting patients’ rights is not necessarily at odds with quality care but an integral part. Although we live in an overly litigious society, if we view patients’ rights as really the culmination of the Golden Rule, Quality Care and Common Sense, I believe that we can find a middle ground that respects the rights of both patients and providers. Every nurse, physician and hospital executive should ask themselves would they be satisfied being a patient in their own facility.

Healthcare Productivity – Valuing Patients’ Time

November 22nd, 2010

I write this as I sit on hold for now going on 1:05:50 hours trying to schedule an MRI at Georgetown Hospital.  Yes, I named names. I usually don’t.  But the list of offenses against patientdom by Georgetown now runs so long my head might pop off. They clearly do not value patients time. If I did not need to be seen by an academic medical center, specifically, one with a transplant center, I would be so out of here.

There is much abuzz for the past few months on how HIT can improve hospital workflow and healthcare practitioner productivity. Never once have I heard anyone speak about trying to improve patient productivity. But I guess no one ever considered that my time and those of other patients is valuable.

Let’s consider just this one test.

1.       I was mailed one slip of paper a week after I spoke with my physician– a universal test requisition form. No instructions on how to schedule, when to schedule, where to go, preparation instructions, anything.

2.        I had to call my doctor’s office and request this practical information. On hold only 3 minutes that time.

3.       I call to schedule an appointment. So far this is 1:14:26 and counting.

4.       Assuming I get an appointment (big assumption), I know I need to allow extra time to park because the current parking is woefully inadequate.

(note as I was wrapping up I was finally connected 1:28:44 – no apology. 1st dates/times given were incorrect because of the type of test I need. Then offered 12/21 date – forget egg nog, pass the contrast. So my test ordered 10/29/10 will not be done until 1/10/11. And I have to get renal function tests beforehand – I know what they are for, but no explanation was offered)

5.       There is the wait for the test, usually no relationship to actual appointment time.

6.       I have never yet gotten non –ER lab or other test results back in less than 2 weeks.  Often I have to be proactive about tracking them down with my doctor.

7.       Then I guess we start all over again for whatever treatment is necessary.

By my calculations this will take at least 8 hours of my time not counting the meditation time it will take to recover from the frustration. A full work day’s worth of effort for just one test. Multiply this by millions of patients. Can our economy afford this?

What if:

1.       My doctor’s office (at this same institution mind you) scheduled the appointment for me or could point me to online scheduling options.

2.       Directions, instructions, etc were available online and downloadable.

3.       Any prerequisite tests would be ordered automatically or at least an alert sent up to my doctor that she needs to write an order.

4.       MRI results were available promptly and accessible through a patient portal.

5.       A follow up call or visit was automatically requested/scheduled prompted by the MRI results.

If I hung up I would be labeled a non-compliant patient, not following up on my doctor’s instructions, a bad patient.  What responsibility does the institution have to make healthcare work?

1:39:45 hours

Consumers v Patients

November 1st, 2010

Although often use interchangeably, there are distinctive differences between consumers and patients in the context of healthcare.  Much is made of what to call those of us actively engaged in pursuing and receiving medical care from health professionals and this post does not intend to settle that issue, but after reviewing countless new conferences, pieces of legislation or regulation, coalitions, job titles, and  grant opportunities,  I’ve discerned a shift towards using consumers as the catch-all term to describe what are actually segments with different experiences, needs, views, and behaviors within the healthcare system.  Too often I see the few seats at the table begrudgingly opened to non-physician or non-academician or non-corporate  parties are filled by labor unions, general consumer groups, and organizations whose average members may not have visited a doctor in years. Organizers, though, feel satisfied in checking off the patient representation box.

Consumers, in my personal dictionary, are members of the general public. Consumers may be perfectly healthy (or think they are) with little contact, or desire to be in contact with the medical system.  The term consumer is also associated with rational nonurgent cost and feature comparison activities demonstrated in other industries with more transparent information sharing.

Patients, acute patients for the purposes of this post, are people with some illness or injury necessitating an interaction with the healthcare system.  They are not electively consuming goods or resources, but trying to secure the more effective treatment with the least amount of pain, time, and cost (if there is a choice or information). Their experience with clinical settings and information may be short-lived and soon forgotten.  If there was no error or incidence involved patients may return to their lives without having been significantly shaped or changed.

Patient Warriors, those patients with chronic diseases, diseases that are potentially terminal or that leave life-changing and to whatever degree life-defining marks (visible or invisible), offer something fundamentally different to the conversation.  Experience over 2 decades with 3 conditions at 4 institutions with 5(to the nth power) physicians, nurses, fellows, medical students, and techs is quantitatively and qualitatively richer than that of an acute patient or a consumer.  Their cost calculations are too often, should I buy food or medicine? should I bankrupt my family or save my life? should I pay these medical bills or my mortgage?

There is a great need from a population health perspective to reach all three segments but the approaches and expectations of each should be varied.  Moreover, than cannot be substituted for one another for research, policymaking, or other purposes.

Consider these questions:

Do consumers want access to their personal health records?

What role do patients want to play as part of their healthcare team?

Can patients be experts?

What is the consumer perspective on comparative effectiveness research?

These questions are almost meaningless as asked.  Consumers may not care one whit about access to a personal health record, but it may mean life and death to a patient warrior.  Patients (subject to individual preference and temperament) may want to be informed while a Patient Warrior may want to be perceived as a full partner or have endured for so long they just want the key decisions while they maintain a positive mindset.  Patients may not be interested in becoming an expert. Patient warriors (often E-patients) may spend hundreds or thousands of hours reading, attending medical conferences, questioning other patients and physicians.  Consumers may consider comparative effectiveness research as commonsensical as having Consumer Reports for other products and look forward to cost-savings.  A patient or patient warrior may be skeptical that a personalized treatment option may be made inaccessible to them.

Extent of interaction with the healthcare system and impact of health issues on someone’s life are the defining factors in determining these population segments.  If we really are to solve the myriad of challenges affecting healthcare we can’t afford to be lazy in our language or our thinking about ensuring that all stakeholders are truly considered and engaged appropriately.

Patient ID

October 18th, 2010

Almost everyone is familiar with the paper bracelet that hospitals put on people to mark the change in their status to that of a patient. The bracelet identifies the name, age, admitting physician, and often now includes a barcode with additional data that confirms the medical condition, authorized procedures, and medications. As someone who, if I kept them all, would possess enough hospital patient ID bracelets to make into a garland for a Christmas tree of robust circumference, I can’t wait to gnaw, snip, slip, or cut off that bracelet as soon as I leave the view of the discharge nurse.
I realize that others can not so easily shed their patient identity. Their injuries or disabilities, temporary or permanent, continue to identify them instantly to the world as patients, evoking sympathy, empathy, pity, or simply unwanted attention. I’ve never wanted anyone to pity me, make exceptions, or deny me opportunities that I knew I could manage, simply because of perceived limitations. However, as an adult with a long track record of successfully overcoming the physical and emotional challenges of balancing chronic disease with school, work, life, I’ve started to question why I feel the need to escape or hide from the fact that I live with chronic and sometimes acute health conditions.
Three short vignettes from the past few weeks may help explore this evolution in my patient identification:
1. No blood from my hands
I don’t allow anyone to stick my hands with needles to take blood. I’ve had periods of my life that have necessitated repeated blood draws and IV insertions over the course of days, weeks, or even months. Add a few years on prednisone, a dash of dehydration and I have become what’s called in the trade “a hard stick”. Often the usual spot on the inside of my elbow is uncooperative and the tech, nurse, or phlebotomist starts looking at my hands. Recently in the hospital after explaining for the 3rd time that I don’t allow blood to be taken from my hands, I started to cry. The nurse stopped and gave me the opportunity to explain that my hands are the one unviolated spot on my body after years of medical treatments. They were unscarred. Frankly, I have beautiful hands, manicured hands, long fingers made to play the piano or show off fancy rings. When I left the hospital, I could take off the hospital gown, bracelet, put on long sleeves, and appear again as a “normal” person, a healthy person. I got to be in charge of when I revealed my patient status. If my hands were as bruised, bandaged, or scarred as the rest of me there was no hiding, not even from myself.

2. Donna Cryer – Liver Disease
Picking up my name badge at the registration desk at a workshop for patient representatives for the FDA I was a bit taken aback when I saw that it read Donna Cryer/Liver Disease. I understood the purpose of the identification to help us understand and interact with the other patient reps, but in all the hundreds of events I’ve attended, most on healthcare topics, I’ve never been literally labeled by my disease. Of course in this setting, I expected to be disclosing my conditions early and often, but it was no longer my choice in how I presented myself. Contrast with a visit to my doctor’s new office where the staff mistook me for a drug rep. What greater confirmation of polish and perkiness that that! It might have also spoken to the volume of my medical records I was toting that may have been mistaken for a same case, but I digress . . .

3. DCpatient/Donna Cryer
My business manager made me tweet. Let me explain, I am a lawyer, not only by education or training, but by essential temperament. Social media, self-disclosure, does not come naturally to me. In being pushed to blog, I thought, let me start with Twitter, 140 characters of opinion at a time. Also, rather than Tweet as Donna Cryer, JD, I would create an alterego, DCpatient, my patient identity. This blog quickly followed, but still I had this naïve attitude that I could keep these identities, these worlds, separate. How separate they could ever be since I run a healthcare consulting firm focused on advancing patient issues and perspectives? Still, color me surprised the first time someone recognized me as DCPatient while at an evening event with clients. After the E-Patient Conference in Philadelphia, most everyone was using my “real” name and my “patient” name interchangeably. The firewall was broken.

Yesterday, I redrafted my professional bio to include the words “a liver transplant recipient”. There that designation sits next to my Harvard education and Bar association membership. Wearing my patient identification publicly consistently may take more courage that the daily private struggle of living with my conditions.

Please Vote!!! Patient Advocacy 2.0

August 11th, 2010

Please Vote!!! Patient Advocacy 2.0
I really wanted to call my presentation Patient Advocacy in 3-D. See why.

I am very excited to have the potential to speak at the 18th annual SXSW® Interactive Festival. This unique forum challenges you to envision the future of innovative technology. Featuring five days of compelling presentations from the brightest minds in emerging media and scores of exciting networking events hosted by industry leaders, SXSW Interactive offers an unbeatable line up of special programs showcasing the best new websites, digital projects, wireless applications, video games and startup ideas the community has to offer. From hands-on training to big-picture analysis, SXSW Interactive has become the place to preview of what is unfolding in the world of creative technology. Join us March 2011 for the panels, the parties, the 14th Annual Interactive Awards, SXSW ScreenBurn, the SXSW Trade Show, SXSW Accelerator and, of course, the inspirational experience that only SXSW can deliver.

My presentation would ask and answer: How can we make patient advocacy more like Avatar? Why would we want to?

Thinking about patient participation in healthcare as an immersive 3-D experience instead of a flat 2-D social media experience can transform personal and public advocacy on health and healthcare delivery issues. Patients as makers of healthcare policy, rather than just commenters on the gaps, flaws, and dysfunctions in policy is the next stage of patient advocacy evolution.

• How has the aggregation of patient voices in online communities created platforms for advocacy?
• What is the difference between personal and public advocacy?
• How can we translate online activism into actual policy and systems change?
• What are the barriers, internal and external, to translation of healthcare 2.0 to healthcare 3-D?
• What opportunities are there for patient advocates to influence policy?
Please vote and please join me (fingers crossed) next March in Austin, TX!
http://panelpicker.sxsw.com/ideas/index/7/presenter:Cryer/category:

From DCpatient to CTcaregiver

May 17th, 2010

While in NYC for business I received a call from my mother that my father had been admitted to the hospital. I raced home to Connecticut arriving at the hospital to find my father on a gurney in the hallway, pale and connected to oxygen and other tubing, waiting to be wheeled down to testing. I leaned over to kiss his cheek and let him know I was there.

So began my transition from DCpatient to CTcaregiver.

I’ve spent the bulk of the past two weeks trying to coordinate care for my father and support my mother as they struggled to understand and adapt to this health crisis and what it means moving forward. Now was the time to see if I could actually apply all the fancy patient advocacy talk and e-patientism to a situation closer to home.

1st Lesson: Being a caregiver is much harder than being a patient. You get no meds and never get to lie down.

2nd Lesson: Education is not Empowerment.
My parents are very smart people. My mother has a PhD and my father has 2 masters degrees. They are retired teachers – my father taught life science. Still the amount of detailed information on the myriad conditions that my father was battling and the pace and format at which this information was given was overwhelming. Also, information was also given without context. For example, in the huge package of information there was a list of the sodium levels of different foods. BFD. What was the recommended goal for how much sodium he should have each day? What should be the limits for sodium per serving he looks for on labels? My task was not to give them more information (although my husband and I were looking up drug information and clinical guidelines on our phones from the hospital room) but to give them tools to help them digest the information and apply it to their lives.

3rd Lesson: Fragmentation of the healthcare system can kill ya.
Now I knew this from my own experience, but since I have the ability to compensate for the gaps and uncoordination of medical care in my own situation, I did not truly appreciate the potential consequences of not getting it right. The most important and impactful things I did while I was with my parents was to get support services in place from the Visiting Nurses Service, schedule follow up appointments with all of their doctors, and to ensure that follow up testing was ordered, conducted, and shared in a timely fashion. My Dad is on coumadin for example, but the order for the INR (the test to see if his blood is being appropriately thinned to avoid clots but not too much) was not given, and then they expected him to travel to the office to have it drawn. IMHO all of this should have been done before discharge.

I could go on and I’m sure I’ll write about this more, but let me leave this post with . . .
Five Things Hospitals Can Do to Make it Easier for Caregivers, Reduce Readmissions, and Improve Patient Care:
1. Upon admission, prompt for ALL doctor’s names and ALL medication. Have a mechanism to alert all a patient’s doctors that the patient has been admitted. My Dad had eye drops that were counterindicated with his blood pressure meds and the ophthalmologist and cardiologist never knew of each other.
2. Proactively provide timely information and updates to family twice a day. (Luckily I knew enough to skulk around the nurses’ station well before posted visiting hours spotting anyone in a white coat or tie who handled my father’s chart to corner them into an update and plan for treatment. It shouldn’t be that hard.)
3. Conduct training. Don’t just give pamphlets before discharge. God bless my 70-something year old mother for figuring out how to wrangle my Dad’s oxygen tank and foley catheter into the car. Good luck trying to get my transplanted southern African-American parents to instantly transition to a low sodium, low fat, complex carb diet without significant intervention.
4. Schedule all follow up and have prescriptions ready upon discharge. The caregiver may not be able to leave the patient to pick up prescriptions and has too much on their hands to play round robins on the phone with multiple providers.
5. Finally, I’d like to request a 24 hour cafeteria. I appreciate the thought of the “Vending Café’”, but I’m never going to order a seafood salad sandwich from a vending machine and I don’t want to end up in the bed next to my Dad because I passed out from hypoglycemia. Caregivers need their strength to shoulder all the burdens laid there by the healthcare system.

National Family Caregivers Association http://www.nfcacares.org/

National Transitions of Care Coordination http://www.ntocc.org/

Patient Advocacy from the Inside Out

April 12th, 2010

The traditional view of patient advocacy is a group of patients in various stages of a condition – sick, well, wheelchaired, put your youngest and oldest members up front – storming Capitol Hill for photo ops on the steps and protesting outside an office and getting a perfunctory “we support research” from the junior staff before leaving. Surely some long-suffering well-connected heads of patient advocacy organizations and their hand-picked favorite patient are invited to testify at a hearing or opine on a bill as one of 100 in a room at a public session.

If we look closer, though, sometimes patient advocacy has a different look. Sometimes patient advocates are the policymakers themselves. Two recent experiences brought home to me the power of policymakers and key influencers sensitized by their own experiences with facing a life-threatening diagnosis, navigating a dysfunctional health system, and balancing an illness with work, family, and life.

The Honorable Hank Johnson, member of congress from Georgia’s 4th district, gave his support for the HR 3974, the Viral Hepatitis and Liver Cancer Control & Prevention Act at a press conference for the National Viral Hepatitis Roundtable after fighting his own battle with hepatitis C. Mr. Johnson discussed the impact of the legislation not only from an understanding of the statistics, as did his colleague Bill Cassidy, a practicing hepatologist in addition to representing his Louisianan constituency, but from his understanding of the stigma, fear, loss of identity, and perceived lack of productivity and potential.

My second experience in the same week came from a conversation with Billy Tauzin, the soon to retire head of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. Mr. Tauzin, a former Republican and Democratic member of Congress and instrumental to the passage of Medicare Part D’s drug benefit is credited often as a savvy politician and negotiator. I appreciate how he has put patients’ voices and experiences, including his own, front and center, better connecting the products that the industry produces to the lives they save that anyone else. And he carries this voice and message to places – high-stakes formal and informal negotiations — where it truly matters. His advocacy has an authenticity money cannot buy having originated in a hospital bed, with a dire diagnosis and a medication that restored him to health.

This is not a plea for emotion-based legislation or for everyone to tout their own personal interest above what’s best for the country, but if policymakers are expected to bring their experiences in banking, business, and law to bear on their work, why shouldn’t they bring their experience as patients. While I wish every member of congress good health, I hope that if they do have personal experience with the healthcare system that they channel that into making and supporting relevant, reality-based healthcare policy.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/230061

Profiles in Courage 2010 Edition

March 23rd, 2010

I remember reading President John F. Kennedy’s Profiles in Courage when I was a girl and being inspired by the recounting of Senators standing up to colleagues and constituents alike to speak out and vote on principle for what they thought was in the highest interest of the nation. Courage was the word that has most frequently come to mind with the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, better known and the Health Reform Bill, Sunday night in the House of Representatives. Despite levels of vitriol not seen since the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, complete with shouting, spitting, and name-calling outside and inside the Chamber, Democratic members of Congress came together to lead. With this bill the administration made a statement about who we are as a nation, as a people, a nation that cares and supports all its citizens, a nation that understands that a foundation of health is necessary for enjoyment of all our constitutional rights and the many privileges of living and working in this great country, a nation that can find money for peace as well as war.

Some say that this is a government take-over of healthcare. It is not. Insurance companies, drug manufacturers, and hospitals are still standing and benefit from more insured. Small businesses are key beneficiaries and there will greater opportunities for job mobility without fear of losing and never regaining insurance coverage one can afford. Patients benefit. Almost all of us will have a “pre-existing condition” if we live long enough.

Some say it costs too much. How much is too much for health? Ralph Waldo Emerson once said that “The first wealth is health”. We would do well to remember that. Do we need to do more to reduce (not just shift) costs of healthcare while maintaining/improving quality? Yes. However, one bill is not required to do all things.
If the purpose of government in a capitalistic, constitutional democracy is to do collectively what we cannot do individually to ensure a strong, stable and prosperous country then this Democratic Congress has done its job. They have my vote not only in the next election, but for the next edition of Profiles in Courage.