Health records firm Epic, some 60 client hospitals urge against data sharing rules support...

Posted:
in General Discussion edited February 2020
A report on Wednesday revealed the contents of health records giant Epic Systems' letter opposing proposed government policy that would allow patients easy access to their medical data, an initiative supported by Apple and other tech industry players.

Health Records


Obtained by CNBC, the letter to Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar warns a pending initiative to push through rules on data interoperability would be "overly burdensome" on America's health system and "will endanger patient privacy."

Proposed by the HHS in 2019, the plan modifies rules governing access to health information, allowing patients to more easily obtain and share personal data.

In response, Epic CEO Judy Faulkner in January urged hospitals to speak out against the new rules as proponents of the measure voiced a counter opinion. Roughly 60 major hospitals have signed on in support of Epic's effort, the report said.

Apple, Google and Microsoft are among a cadre of companies, patient advocates and caregivers that came out in favor of the HHS rules. Late last month the three tech industry titans participated in a meeting held by the nonpartisan Carin Alliance, which seeks to modernize health records systems in the U.S. by breaking data out of first-party silos and fostering cooperative exchange between health care providers.

As it stands, patients often run into issues when attempting to obtain or share their information, as data is typically stored on physical media or protected by systems like those marketed by Epic. According to today's report, an Epic installation can cost up to $1 billion for major hospitals, a price that could increase should the HHS initiative be successful.

"While we support HHS' goal of empowering patients with their health data and reducing costs through the 21st Century Cures Act, we are concerned that ONC's Proposed Rule on interoperability will be overly burdensome on our health system and will endanger patient privacy," Epic's letter reads in part. "Specifically, the scope of regulated data, the timeline for compliance, and the significant costs and penalties will make it extraordinarily difficult for us to comply."

Epic's entreaty recommends tweaks to the proposal including additional information on the handling of health information related to family members, as well as a longer timeline for integration. The health records company wants at least 12 months to prepare and 36 months for "development of new technology required by the rule," the report said.

Along with the hospitals backing Epic's letter, a few organizations sent similar pleas to the HHS on their own accord. Not all Epic customers are in alignment on the matter, as some of the firm's largest clients failed to sign the January letter.

Apple has for years worked to break into the health industry, first with iOS apps and more recently through technologies built on wearable platforms like Apple Watch. As it pertains to health data transportability, the company in 2018 launched Health Records on iOS, enabling iPhone users to securely store and share medical data from participating healthcare providers.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 45
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    we are concerned that ONC's Proposed Rule on interoperability will be overly burdensome on our health system and will endanger patient privacy,"
    Bull!
    EPIC and the hospitals are not concerned about patient privacy or cost (When did our healthcare system ever worry about cost?)

    They ARE concerned about losing control of patient data for a plethora of reasons:  Once control of the data is taken away from "The System" the patient has a lot more knowledge and control -- which can put the hospital in bad spot.  Basically, our healthcare system, particularly at the hospital level, has always been adamant on maintaining total control of what goes on -- the patient is limited to refusing care, but even that is very difficult.   In addition, the patient's data would lose a great deal of its monetary value as they would not be able to sell it themselves to companies like Google (which one major system has already done).

    When thinking about why our large health care operations do something always think money and profits because that is all that they think of - just as any other corporation does.  This proposal will cost them both in money and control so they are opposed to it.   Their objections have nothing to do with protecting the patient -- that's just the shield they hide behind.
    mld53abala1234anantksundaramnetroxmanfred zornrhbellmorbeowulfschmidtn2itivguylarryaCycliste
  • Reply 2 of 45
    Another example of corporate greed and profiteering in health care at the expense of consumers. The effort by Epic to stop this is an even better example of how our system of money in politics sets up to sell government to those with the money. This is a massive and very expensive lobbying campaign to control the economics of health data business at the expense of us and our families. The idea that Epic has anything but their self interest as their goal is beyond laughable. It’s amazing they can say this stuff with a straight face.
    mld53apscooter63manfred zornrhbellmorGeorgeBMacspice-boyStrangeDaysjony0kurai_kagewatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 45
    Most likely, Epic simply senses a threat to their long-term domination of this business, and these hospitals are toeing the line dutifully because they're too far in bed with Epic to imagine getting out in one piece. I've had the misfortune to actually use Epic at a couple jobs, and IMNSHO, it's a real mess.
    manfred zornrhbellmorGeorgeBMacn2itivguyrandominternetpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 45
    EPIC is a very greedy company and nearly a monopoly. The opportunity exists to “open source” all health information systems and give patients universal access. The Obama administration gave Epic near Carte Blanche to drive up IT medical information costs. They structured parts of Obama Care to favor them! It’s time to reduce healthcare costs and open up healthcare to competition.
    mld53amanfred zornrhbellmorn2itivguySpamSandwichwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 45
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,911member
    EPIC is a very greedy company and nearly a monopoly. The opportunity exists to “open source” all health information systems and give patients universal access. The Obama administration gave Epic near Carte Blanche to drive up IT medical information costs. They structured parts of Obama Care to favor them! It’s time to reduce healthcare costs and open up healthcare to competition.
    This.

    Epic is a billion dollar, privately held corporation that has a near monopoly in healthcare. (Think Microsoft Windows in the 90’s) Hospitals and healthcare systems spend millions to tens of millions per year to lease Epic Software, one component is ‘my chart.’ Once you buy in to one part of Epic, you’re committed to every part of it and any open source system would directly harm their ability to maintain a monopoly. 

    Epic’s concern isn’t for patients, it’s for their bottom line.
    agilealtituderhbellmorGeorgeBMacn2itivguyCyclisterandominternetpersonStrangeDayskurai_kagewatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 45
    Epic! Shut Up! Sit Down!! No one loves you!
    edited February 2020 rhbellmorwatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 45
    larryjwlarryjw Posts: 1,031member
    Looks like commenters failed to read the article. Epic says they need 12 months to plan, 36 months to implement. 

    Given we're talking about health care records, it would probably be best to plan for security and implement correctly.

    How many would like their health care records handled like the Iowa caucus fiasco? 
    gatorguy
  • Reply 8 of 45
    KBChicagoKBChicago Posts: 21unconfirmed, member
    we are concerned that ONC's Proposed Rule on interoperability will be overly burdensome on our health system and will endanger patient privacy,"
    Bull!
    EPIC and the hospitals are not concerned about patient privacy or cost (When did our healthcare system ever worry about cost?)

    They ARE concerned about losing control of patient data for a plethora of reasons:  Once control of the data is taken away from "The System" the patient has a lot more knowledge and control -- which can put the hospital in bad spot.  Basically, our healthcare system, particularly at the hospital level, has always been adamant on maintaining total control of what goes on -- the patient is limited to refusing care, but even that is very difficult.   In addition, the patient's data would lose a great deal of its monetary value as they would not be able to sell it themselves to companies like Google (which one major system has already done).

    When thinking about why our large health care operations do something always think money and profits because that is all that they think of - just as any other corporation does.  This proposal will cost them both in money and control so they are opposed to it.   Their objections have nothing to do with protecting the patient -- that's just the shield they hide behind.
    Nah.  EPIC is worried about your information become accessible to any software maker thus making it easier for healthcare providers to move to another provider.  Right now, EPIC has a lock on the market.  The moment the information becomes open source/cross platform, this dominance is lost.  Currently, if you are a hospital who stores their records on EPIC, it is monumentally expensive and cost prohibitive to event consider switching platforms.  EPIC will get crushed by innovation as it currently looks like software made in the late 90's.
    rhbellmorrandominternetpersonkurai_kagewatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 45
    I’ll go with Apple any day compared to some crappy company that feeds like a buzzard off my health care data. 

    Apple will win this battle. People are just getting sick and tired of the data mining bullshit. 
    rhbellmorSpamSandwichStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 45

    larryjw said:
    Looks like commenters failed to read the article. Epic says they need 12 months to plan, 36 months to implement. 

    Given we're talking about health care records, it would probably be best to plan for security and implement correctly.

    How many would like their health care records handled like the Iowa caucus fiasco? 
    Considering the Iowa caucuses have taken what seems like 36 months, nobody gives a damn. 
  • Reply 11 of 45
    Glad to see more people wanting to take control of their own medical data. I wonder how much rampant fraud exists in bogus charges that is hidden somewhere in those records.

    it could be the catalyst for cheaper health insurance when the insured can get a better rate because fraud would be easier to detect.  


    GeorgeBMacwatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 45
    The heck? Whoever is opposed to me easily accessing MY HEALTH RECORDS is scum. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 45
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,092member
    Kind of reminds of of the whining the Australian banks were doing when ApplePay was getting into their business.  End of the world and they tried every kind of political maneuvering to put Apple in a bad light.

    My medical data belongs to me and no one else.  I'm glad Apple is in the running on this.  If there's one company I trust to keep my information secure it's Apple.  

    This is going to be good.
    StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 45
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    KBChicago said:
    we are concerned that ONC's Proposed Rule on interoperability will be overly burdensome on our health system and will endanger patient privacy,"
    Bull!
    EPIC and the hospitals are not concerned about patient privacy or cost (When did our healthcare system ever worry about cost?)

    They ARE concerned about losing control of patient data for a plethora of reasons:  Once control of the data is taken away from "The System" the patient has a lot more knowledge and control -- which can put the hospital in bad spot.  Basically, our healthcare system, particularly at the hospital level, has always been adamant on maintaining total control of what goes on -- the patient is limited to refusing care, but even that is very difficult.   In addition, the patient's data would lose a great deal of its monetary value as they would not be able to sell it themselves to companies like Google (which one major system has already done).

    When thinking about why our large health care operations do something always think money and profits because that is all that they think of - just as any other corporation does.  This proposal will cost them both in money and control so they are opposed to it.   Their objections have nothing to do with protecting the patient -- that's just the shield they hide behind.
    Nah.  EPIC is worried about your information become accessible to any software maker thus making it easier for healthcare providers to move to another provider.  Right now, EPIC has a lock on the market.  The moment the information becomes open source/cross platform, this dominance is lost.  Currently, if you are a hospital who stores their records on EPIC, it is monumentally expensive and cost prohibitive to event consider switching platforms.  EPIC will get crushed by innovation as it currently looks like software made in the late 90's.

    It's important to realize that it is not just EPIC fighting this but also a consortium of major health care organizations.
    The fact is, they make up a team effort to control patient data for their own benefit.
    Sure, EPIC is fighting it.  But so are the healthcare providers.  And they are all fighting it for the same reason:  To protect "The System", its control and its profits.

    Ultimately, it demonstrates the utter and total corruption of the healthcare industry along with its total focus on its own profits -- while Americans debate how to pay for such a corrupt system:  Private insurance?   Employer sponsored insurance?  Single Payer?   Medicare for all?   They truth is:  the root system is corrupt and is milking the country for all its worth.  And, they will continue to milk it regardless of the payment mechanism.  Its just what they do.  All these different payment proposals do is shift the pain around to decide who pays a bill that we cannot afford to pay.
  • Reply 15 of 45
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    Glad to see more people wanting to take control of their own medical data. I wonder how much rampant fraud exists in bogus charges that is hidden somewhere in those records.

    it could be the catalyst for cheaper health insurance when the insured can get a better rate because fraud would be easier to detect.  



    The fraud is deep, wide and pervasive.   This, if successful, would shine a light on only a tiny part of it.   But it would be a start.
  • Reply 16 of 45
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    The heck? Whoever is opposed to me easily accessing MY HEALTH RECORDS is scum. 

    Actually, they aren't your records.   From a legal standpoint, the healthcare provider owns them.  
    In truth, they own the information that they keep about you.  And, in reality, they can sell it and share it as they will -- just as Facebook owns its data about you.  HIPAA only blocks them from sharing it with you and you family -- not other so called healthcare providers -- even if one of them is Google.

    They want to maintain control over what they consider their data about you.

    That doesn't make it right.   But it is reality as it exists today.
    GG1
  • Reply 17 of 45
    How’s does this all fit in with the fact that epic systems ALREADY works with Apple health records?
    SpamSandwichStrangeDays
  • Reply 18 of 45
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    EPIC is a very greedy company and nearly a monopoly. The opportunity exists to “open source” all health information systems and give patients universal access. The Obama administration gave Epic near Carte Blanche to drive up IT medical information costs. They structured parts of Obama Care to favor them! It’s time to reduce healthcare costs and open up healthcare to competition.
    That's not quite true.  But kinda true:
    The Obama administration absolutely supported EHR (Electronic Health Records).   What resulted was mostly unintended consequences.
    The selling point -- and many still believe it -- was to both improve healthcare outcomes and lower costs by enabling healthcare providers to have accurate and timely information to help them do their jobs.  The usual example is when you are rushed to the ER the doctor will be able to know your health history and make better decisions about your care.

    In practice, hospital systems recognized the EHRs could both increase their revenue by streamlining their billing process while limiting their liability.  So they jumped on it and EPIC took full advantage of their greed.

    In reality, in the end, it created another pool of "Big Data" that is worth billions and billions of dollars -- far more than the stuff Facebook, Google and Amazon are able to collect on you.   Healthcare is a $3.5 Trillion a year industry -- 5 times larger than our already bloated defense budget!  Your healthcare records are worth a LOT of money.

    spice-boyktappe
  • Reply 19 of 45
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    zklausz said:
    How’s does this all fit in with the fact that epic systems ALREADY works with Apple health records?

    As I understand it (and I'm not sure that I do), this would add two main things:   The download to Apple Health is limited in that you only get to see a portion of your records plus, you have no control over them -- it's just a straight download of whatever they choose to let you see.   In addition, with this, you could then provide that information to a third party -- say a Shaman promising to cure your cancer or make you beautiful.

    In any event, it is certain to be an enhancement over what they are currently doing or they wouldn't be so strongly opposed to it.
    spice-boy
  • Reply 20 of 45
    jimh2jimh2 Posts: 611member
    48 months to allow the exporting of data from their system? That is a complete lie. 
    GeorgeBMac
Sign In or Register to comment.