Wednesday, May 10, 2006

Defining the HIT Gap

In my prior post, I discussed what HIT is now and what it needs to be. I now define the HIT Gap.

The HIT gap is a result of not making six essential needs a top priority; that is, current HIT does not adequately focus on:

  1. Bridging the knowledge gap — using comprehensive, detailed knowledge of each person and the scientific research to (a) make the best possible treatment decisions within a personalized care framework, (b) deliver that care efficiently and effectively, and (c) enable all consumers to be informed participants in the healthcare decision process and in promoting their own health.
  2. Managing care execution — Helping providers execute their plans of care.
  3. Coordinating care — Coordinating care across multiple providers in the healthcare continuum, so such tools are needed.
  4. Protecting public health — Implementing processes for ongoing biosurveillance, post-market surveillance, and first-responder assistance in case of emergencies, so such tools are needed.
  5. Enabling complete connectivity — Enabling all stakeholders — patients, providers (including RHIOs, facilities, and individuals across all healthcare specialties/disciplines), purchasers, and payors — to compile and share all the data they need for which they are authorized.
  6. Managing extensive data sets — Fostering the fluid access, exchange, analysis and reporting of an enormous diversity of healthcare data sets, including a wide range of physiological (medical and non-medical) and psychosocial data, across patients’ entire lifetimes, about (a) people's disease/dysfunction-specific symptoms and functioning levels; (b) treatment-specific process, clinical outcomes, and practice guideline variance data; (c) genetic data; and (d) expense/financial/utilization data.
Next time I'll present an innovative solution for filling the HIT Gap by satisfying these six unmet needs.

Print this post

Post a Comment