Mar 26, 2009 at 10:01am ET by Greg Sterling
When the long rumored Google Health was announced in early 2008, it appeared to be a very ambitious initiative that had a mountain to climb. That mountain was participation: getting individuals, doctors and hospitals to digitize their records. Then there are the myriad privacy and data security issues.
But Google isn’t the only one in the electronic health records and “health search” game. So is Microsoft. There are scores of others in the segment, as well as billions spent annually in advertising. Despite the money and involvement of companies like Microsoft and Google, digitizing the nation’s health records and getting millions of people to use online tools to manage their health histories seemed an almost insurmountable goal in early 2008.
Then came the election of Barack Obama.
As part of its economic recovery program, the Obama Administration has proposed a multi-billion dollar effort to upgrade the US health care system by making all health records electronic within five years. The idea is that over time it saves money, delivers efficiencies, helps improve the quality of healthcare and overall costs in the system will decline. That effort has given Google Health, Microsoft Health Vault and others a major hypothetical boost. But major challenges remain.
According to a story in the NY Times, two separate medical journal articles identify a range of problems and obstacles to achievement of the Obama Administration’s goal:
Two articles, to be published on Thursday in the New England Journal of Medicine, point to the formidable obstacles to achieving the policy goal of not only installing electronic health records, but also using them to improve care and curb costs.
One article reports that only 9 percent of the nation’s hospitals have electronic health records, based on a survey of nearly 3,000 hospitals . . .
In a second article in the journal, two experts in health information technology at Children’s Hospital Boston assert that spending billions of dollars of federal funds to stimulate the adoption of existing forms of health record software would be a costly policy mistake.
The second article advocates development of an open software platform rather than working within the existing records framework. It’s not clear to me how open-source software would affect Google or Microsoft’s health-related ambitions — probably not significantly.
Billions are literally at stake in answering these questions, however.
Eventually there will be an electronic database of health records in the US. That will certainly yield public and private health benefits as well as cost savings to the system. (Privacy and policy issues preventing abuse will have to be addressed as part of the effort.)
The big unknown is how long it will realistically take to develop that system and whether, if it takes many years, Google or Microsoft will have the patience to wait that long.
Share, Bookmark & Discuss This Article
More:
Keep Updated: News Via Email | News Via RSS Feed | News Via Twitter
See more stories like this in the Members Library! Check out the Google: Health, Microsoft: General, Microsoft: Other sections of the Members Library where this story is filed. Members also get access to exclusive video content, a members-only weekly & monthly newsletter, plus more. Check out all the benefits!
TOP STORIES
SEARCH NEWS BRIEFS
FEATURES & ANALYSIS
RECENT COMMENTS
Stay on top of all the search news with our daily summary, the SearchCap newsletter. View a sample ›
Search Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether you're just starting in search marketing or you're a seasoned expert.
SMX Web Site » | SMX Difference » | SMX News »
Join us at an upcoming SMX event:
Learn more about search marketing with our free online webcasts and webinars from our sister site, Search Marketing Now. Upcoming online events include:
Featured sites from our Blogroll
Become a premium member today and receive:
Premium member since 01/2009
As I was reading this I was thinking the Oakland Raiders will win a Superbowl before we have a functioning electronic records system in the US, and I’m optimistic on the Raiders.
It’s mind boggling the lack of infrastructure and ability that’s in place. I’d love to get rid of the fax machine, but too many still rely on it. I’d love to keep our xrays and records digital, but too many agencies require printed materials. What’s most amazing to me, is some agencies still have people drive to pick up medical records and test results.
Here’s to hoping we get there.
There is definitely a need for a better infrastructure. Adoption of Electronic Health Records will certainly yield public and private benefits as well as cost savings to the system.