May 25, 2012

Friday Tidbits 05-25-12

Normally I would do this in a regular blog, but it is becoming so disheartening the way the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists is not updating the list of approved diabetes resources, that I must entreat them to add a few resources. It seems that a few of those on the current list are getting less traffic now than before they became listed.

Not only are they not listing additional resources, but now they will have to factor in the changes of the American Dietetic Association (past name) to Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (current name) and their way of taking over the field of nutrition and forcing many in that profession to change to other professional organizations to be able to give nutritional advice to people in need.

I also think if the AACE cannot decide whether there are more websites that they can approve, then it is time to take down the page and stop portraying these as the only approved sites. I know there are other sites that deserve being mentioned and I will continue to visit them. Even professional organizations should act professionally. By not keeping their website vibrant and updated, they are doing a disservice to themselves and their profession. This says nothing about the patients that could benefit from some of the listings.

The site page listing the approved websites became active on September 27, 2011 and has not added another approve site since. Granted, the “experts” are probably busy earning a living, but does it take almost eight months with no additions. I am sorry, but this does not make for good public relations. I will continue to call attention to inaction on the part of the AACE. Endocrinologists should also be reminding their association that more needs to be done to expand the list as this could help them proudly point to the list of approved sites.

This is a very disturbing article to read. I had high hopes for telemedicine and thought it could be very useful in some cases. “In response to concerns about tele-medicine’s effect on patient safety, many states have begun prohibiting physicians from prescribing drugs without conducting a prior physical examination. In fact, more than 30 states have instituted this type of rule since 1998.” Apparently, some physicians and lawmakers do not want this to happen.

The laws in these states mandate that the patient be examined by physician before they can prescribe any drugs. This physical examination requirement (PER) has potential far-reaching effects for future programs. This may also be something that can be expanded to counter act the proposed FDA in their approval of over the counter (OTC) medications. It will be interesting to see how this plays out and if physicians can encourage lawmakers to expand these state laws.

Just the fact that the current regulations are costing lives should start making headlines, but will the news media even go there. This is something that needs attention of more bloggers, medical and patient. Also, read this by Jason Shafrin.

The last item is even bigger that the author may realize. He is talking about accountable care organizations (ACOs) that came into being under the Accountable Care Act of 2010. We should learn in June the possible outcome of these and much more when the US Supreme Court announces their decision. Will we still have ACOs or will they be a thing of the past. There have been many articles about the good and bad sides to ACOs and I chose this as one of the more positive writings

Unfortunately, what many writing about ACOs and like this one about health information technology (HIT) seem to ignore is the fact that health information technology is part of a law passed prior to 2010 to put computers in medicine so this will continue to be with us. Whether we like electronic medical records, electronic health records or other electronic care records, these are here to stay.

What we need is greater electronic security for our electronic medical records to prevent other people from gaining access to them and getting medical help at our expense. Yet this always takes a back seat in any discussion of the pros and cons of medical databases.

No comments: