<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: News 12/19/07</title>
	<atom:link href="http://histalk2.com/2007/12/18/news-121907/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://histalk2.com/2007/12/18/news-121907/</link>
	<description>Healthcare IT News and Opinion</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:08:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: HIT Guy</title>
		<link>http://histalk2.com/2007/12/18/news-121907/comment-page-1/#comment-561</link>
		<dc:creator>HIT Guy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 02:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://histalk2.com/2007/12/18/news-121907/#comment-561</guid>
		<description>“Can you imagine if the Gap had to wait 30 days to decide what to charge you for the jeans?”

Yes - because clearly selling a pair of jeans is as clearcut and straightforward as diagnosing and performing complex procedures.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>“Can you imagine if the Gap had to wait 30 days to decide what to charge you for the jeans?”</p>
<p>Yes &#8211; because clearly selling a pair of jeans is as clearcut and straightforward as diagnosing and performing complex procedures.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rockr</title>
		<link>http://histalk2.com/2007/12/18/news-121907/comment-page-1/#comment-560</link>
		<dc:creator>Rockr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:09:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://histalk2.com/2007/12/18/news-121907/#comment-560</guid>
		<description>Re: Privacy case: The details in this case are sparse as presented here, but if it is the case I am thinking of, I didn&#039;t participate in it, but I know it well.   Re-identification was made because the records contained  full DOB, full Zip and gender which are unique for over 80% of Americans.  For anyone thinking about it, this would be pretty obvious.

A few notes about this (again assuming it&#039;s the one I am thinking of): 1) This case was litigated PRE-HIPAA.  As such, these companies were not subject to the definition of of &quot;de-identification&quot; that is currently operative in the U.S.. Essentially it was the bad old days when name, address and SSN were removed and every other unique detail (like zip, full DOB, etc) was left in the record.;  2) Cases like this served as the basis for the deliberations on how de-identification was defined in HIPAA.  Loopholes like this were closed by provisions that prohibit attempts to re-identify data and that prohibit the release of any data that could be combined with data like voter registry rolls to re-identify patients.  So while I believe a lot of HIPAA has been problematic, I think the definition of de-identification is actually pretty good.  There were some very smart experts in this science consulted about how to frame that definition .

So while I think this case is very interesting, it must viewed in the legal context in which it was litigated.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: Privacy case: The details in this case are sparse as presented here, but if it is the case I am thinking of, I didn&#8217;t participate in it, but I know it well.   Re-identification was made because the records contained  full DOB, full Zip and gender which are unique for over 80% of Americans.  For anyone thinking about it, this would be pretty obvious.</p>
<p>A few notes about this (again assuming it&#8217;s the one I am thinking of): 1) This case was litigated PRE-HIPAA.  As such, these companies were not subject to the definition of of &#8220;de-identification&#8221; that is currently operative in the U.S.. Essentially it was the bad old days when name, address and SSN were removed and every other unique detail (like zip, full DOB, etc) was left in the record.;  2) Cases like this served as the basis for the deliberations on how de-identification was defined in HIPAA.  Loopholes like this were closed by provisions that prohibit attempts to re-identify data and that prohibit the release of any data that could be combined with data like voter registry rolls to re-identify patients.  So while I believe a lot of HIPAA has been problematic, I think the definition of de-identification is actually pretty good.  There were some very smart experts in this science consulted about how to frame that definition .</p>
<p>So while I think this case is very interesting, it must viewed in the legal context in which it was litigated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lazlo Hollyfeld</title>
		<link>http://histalk2.com/2007/12/18/news-121907/comment-page-1/#comment-555</link>
		<dc:creator>Lazlo Hollyfeld</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 04:27:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://histalk2.com/2007/12/18/news-121907/#comment-555</guid>
		<description>Why does everything think the athenahealth is lights-years away from everyone else in the RCM business?  Do they have a nice value prop with a solid business product right now for physician practices?  Sure, but some of the comparisons and boasts are I hear are flat out ridiculous.  &quot;Health 2.0&quot; company? - No.  &quot;Redefining the payer-practice relationship&quot; - Not quite.

If you look at, athenahealth was really a outsourcing billing company/managed service organizations with RCM services. for providers.  Meant athenahealth was competing with two major groups of companies - traditional clearninghouses (emdeon, Gateway EDI, McKesson) and select vendors who provide RCM services to providers (e.g., Navicure, Realmed, Perot Systems).   Lot of vendors but a pretty big pie slice too.  Say $2-$3 billion annually depending on how you break it out.          

It is only recently that athenahealth have begun to offer their EMR product.  athenahealth did this for two main reasons: additional revenue streams from an ambulatory EMR product and the trend for a consolidated EMR/PMS solution for physicians who were looking to replace/upgrade their PMS solution.  I don&#039;t know what kind of traction the athenahealth EMR is getting but I would imagine most physicians are pretty leary of being a guinea pig.  I could be completely wrong though since I know next to nothing about their install base and the actual product.  

One thing that is It is important to note though that  the big EMRs guys like GE Healthcare, NextGen, and others who have already a decent EMR install base have seen what athenahealth did and are moving to offer RCM services to their EMR install base.  I can&#039;t say for sure what effect this might have but I am willing to make a bet that athenahealth will be hard pressed to move into practices that already have a NextGen EMR and are getting RCM services from them too.  

There is still a huge market pie that athenahealth can gradually expand on the RCM side and it will be interesting to see what kind of traction their athenahealth EMR gets but lets not go overboard.  Solid company with solid value proposition for RCM but it is not like they are the greatest thing since sliced bread.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why does everything think the athenahealth is lights-years away from everyone else in the RCM business?  Do they have a nice value prop with a solid business product right now for physician practices?  Sure, but some of the comparisons and boasts are I hear are flat out ridiculous.  &#8220;Health 2.0&#8243; company? &#8211; No.  &#8220;Redefining the payer-practice relationship&#8221; &#8211; Not quite.</p>
<p>If you look at, athenahealth was really a outsourcing billing company/managed service organizations with RCM services. for providers.  Meant athenahealth was competing with two major groups of companies &#8211; traditional clearninghouses (emdeon, Gateway EDI, McKesson) and select vendors who provide RCM services to providers (e.g., Navicure, Realmed, Perot Systems).   Lot of vendors but a pretty big pie slice too.  Say $2-$3 billion annually depending on how you break it out.          </p>
<p>It is only recently that athenahealth have begun to offer their EMR product.  athenahealth did this for two main reasons: additional revenue streams from an ambulatory EMR product and the trend for a consolidated EMR/PMS solution for physicians who were looking to replace/upgrade their PMS solution.  I don&#8217;t know what kind of traction the athenahealth EMR is getting but I would imagine most physicians are pretty leary of being a guinea pig.  I could be completely wrong though since I know next to nothing about their install base and the actual product.  </p>
<p>One thing that is It is important to note though that  the big EMRs guys like GE Healthcare, NextGen, and others who have already a decent EMR install base have seen what athenahealth did and are moving to offer RCM services to their EMR install base.  I can&#8217;t say for sure what effect this might have but I am willing to make a bet that athenahealth will be hard pressed to move into practices that already have a NextGen EMR and are getting RCM services from them too.  </p>
<p>There is still a huge market pie that athenahealth can gradually expand on the RCM side and it will be interesting to see what kind of traction their athenahealth EMR gets but lets not go overboard.  Solid company with solid value proposition for RCM but it is not like they are the greatest thing since sliced bread.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

