It’s bonanza time for people intrigued with the OpenNotes project, which we mentioned Saturday. While looking for something else tonight, I ran across this, about OpenNotes, from December: “Concern that sharing information with patients may cause sustained psychological distress is probably unfounded.”
It cross-posts a great piece by Ted Eytan MD and cites a December 17 WIHI episode (webcast by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement; MP3 audio here). If you have an interest in patient access issues, you must read Ted’s post and see the linked documents. One is from NEJM, “Giving the patient his medical record” – from 1973. The other article cites evidence from Denmark that fears about patient access did not materialize; that paper is from 1991.
Who says this industry is slow to change? :–)
But we have made progress: the 1973 paper reports that in 41 states you could only see your record through litigation!
Wonderful thinking in Ted’s post, and sobering background reading. Consider it in your thinking.
Dave,
For years the Portland VA (and other sites) gave access to notes for patients authenticated to the PHR. Initially (mostly mental health) providers wanted to approve access on a case-by-case basis. When demand for approval became burdensome of their time, this process was abandoned.
My post predicting Open Notes study findings:
http://www.sharedhealthdata.com/2010/06/13/prediction-with-open-progress-notes-another-grand-slam/