Date post: | 27-Mar-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | joshua-lawson |
View: | 214 times |
Download: | 2 times |
National Health Policy ConferenceFebruary 5, 2007
Personal Health Records: Increasing Health Care Value Through Enhanced Patient Engagement
Steve Downs
February 5, 2008
PHRs Today
Attributes Tethered Free-Standing Networked
Offered by providersinsurers,
employers3rd parties
3rd parties, RHIOs, providers?
Types of Dataclinical (EHR), self-entered
claims, labs, meds, self-entered
virtually anything but typically self-
entered
clinical (EHR), self-entered
Comprehen-siveness of
Data
limited to provider network
very broad (anything claimed)
limited by user entry
potentially very broad (depends on extent of network)
Transactional Features (e.g. appointment scheduling)
yes with insurer typically not ?
February 5, 2008
Next-Generation PHRs
Focus on the applications, not the record
Open platform with published APIs
3rd party developers build the applications
February 5, 2008
New Developments
February 5, 2008
New Developments
February 5, 2008
New Developments
February 5, 2008
New Developments
February 5, 2008
Transmedia Systems
February 5, 2008
Transmedia Systems
February 5, 2008
Transmedia Systems
February 5, 2008
3rd Party Widgets
February 5, 2008
3rd Party Widgets
February 5, 2008
3rd Party Widgets
February 5, 2008
Project HealthDesign
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation National Program with support from California Healthcare Foundation
Led by Patti Brennan, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Nine teams designing and prototyping personal health applications
www.projecthealthdesign.org
February 5, 2008
Project HealthDesign
Two key hypotheses:
1) If you start from the person instead of the data, you get a different looking PHR
2) Diverse applications can be enabled by a core PHR infrastructure
www.projecthealthdesign.org