Curbside Consult with Dr. Jayne 4/21/25

I’m doing a consulting gig in a different part of the country and was excited to get out and see a bit of the local color. Those colors trended towards red, white, and rosé, which for me typically lead to a low-key afternoon.

I was certainly glad to visit an area where the weather doesn’t seem to be out to get me with torrential rain, flooding, or tornadoes as I’ve experienced in my travels over the last year.

As I work in different parts of the US, I’m constantly aware of the differences in healthcare resources depending on where people live. I’ve worked in affluent areas where no one ever seems to be uninsured and I’ve worked in places where the majority of patients are uninsured or underinsured. You’ll find compassionate and committed physicians in both of those settings, but there are different skill sets needed depending on the makeup of your patient population.

Even when I’m working on strategic planning projects, I like to start from the ground up with a little bit of workflow observation and some stakeholder interviews. This week, I worked with an organization where it feels like the physicians are 80% social worker and only spend 20% of their efforts on what people would consider typical physician tasks. Every exam room had cheat sheets to help physicians know which social services organizations might be able to help their patients.

One of my first questions when analyzing their workflow was why those resources weren’t somehow captured electronically so that physicians could make them part of their discharge documentation as patients left the office. Although some physicians had incorporated some of the information into their personal documentation shortcuts, it sounded like there isn’t any appetite in the IT budget to spend time on things that aren’t considered critical to patient care, such as maintaining the medication formularies and order sets. The organization tightly controls access to EHR resources, so even if there were physicians or other clinicians who might be capable of building additional tools to better support clinicians and patients, they wouldn’t be allowed into the system anyway.

Given the size of the location and the patient mix where I was observing clinicians that day, I asked if the organization had considered embedding social workers or care navigators in the practice to assist with patients’ needs. Apparently they used to have a part-time nurse navigator in the practice, but the role was eliminated and the nurse was moved to a centralized location to help with phone triage.

One could make a theoretical argument that having someone in a role like that would pay for itself because it would free up the physicians to see more patients, but the reality is that the physicians already have full schedules and full patient panels. They are doing the extra work either on top of their clinical responsibilities or instead of them. They are already optimizing their coding and billing processes to document all the work they’re doing “coordinating care” for the patients, which is a good thing, but doesn’t create the opportunity to bring in more revenue unless there’s some way to adjust the payer mix.

I looked at a lot more factors, not only in this location, but in several others. I found several areas in the EHR that could be optimized and others that needed significant work just to bring the existing content up to support the current standard of care. As an example, it didn’t look like the immunizations or health maintenance portions of the system had been kept current with changes to guidelines over the last year.

That lack of regular EHR maintenance was creating additional work for both physicians and clinical support staff. Knowing the system in question, fixing it all would probably be less than 10 hours of analyst time if you include requirements writing, approvals, build, testing, and implementation. The physicians I spoke with didn’t know if anyone had opened a ticket with the help desk to request the updates, and the EHR team had such a backlog of requests that they didn’t know if they had the respective requests on file.

After a lot of back and forth trying to sort it out, several things were clear to me:

• There was no proactive process to monitor for guideline changes and ensure they made it into the EHR in a timely fashion. This is important when there are major changes and there hasn’t been time for EHR vendors to get them into an update release.
• The organization was woefully behind on taking their vendor-recommended updates, as I knew a couple of the issues had been fixed in patches that weren’t terribly recent.
• There was a disconnect in the ability of the IT team to know whether the system was really working for its users or not.

As I often see in consulting engagements, researching each issue led to other issues. We found many more opportunities for changes that would benefit both physicians and patients.

As I returned to the hotel each night, I had a little bit of consulting whiplash, which happens when you’re working with one client during the day, finishing up projects for other clients in the evening, and reflecting on the stark differences between the projects.

The evening project on one of those days was for a client that is definitely more on the resource-rich end of the spectrum. They hired me to work on some custom content for a particular disease process where they’re trying to improve their clinical quality scores by a very small percentage. Their clinicians are not only using the most updated EHR content available, but also have access to human scribes at some locations as well as ambient documentation solutions nearly everywhere else. Clinics have health coaches and others to support some of the same processes that I had seen physicians doing during the day.

Those of us who have worked on population health projects know how significant your ZIP code can be as far as predicting your health status. This week brought it home to me in a way that it hasn’t done in several years.

These kinds of disparities aren’t something you can solve by throwing AI at them, although AI can help illustrate the nature of the problem more quickly than manually crunching the numbers. I’m going to have to think creatively about the strategic planning project I’m working on for my daytime client, although it’s going to be one of the trickier engagements I’ve done in a while. On days like this I wish I could find a magic lamp with which I could make three wishes to improve the healthcare system. Instead, I’ll have to come up with some incremental changes that can be done quickly and on the cheap while we formulate a strategy for the larger issues.

What are the major challenges facing your organization this year? If you could make three wishes, what would they be? Leave a comment or email me.

Email Dr. Jayne.

EPtalk by Dr. Jayne 4/17/25

I’ve been a follower of prescription digital therapeutics for years. I have watched with great sadness as companies have come and gone without getting the traction their products needed to help broad groups of patients.

Click Therapeutics recently received FDA marketing authorization for the first prescription digital therapeutic for prevention of migraine headaches. The solution, called CT-132, is designed to be used in conjunction with other preventive or acute migraine treatments for patients aged 18 years and older. The study used for its application looked at the therapeutic’s use in patients who were already receiving treatment that met the standard of care and was able to significantly reduce the number of migraine days per month.

The company already offers solutions for a number of conditions including depression, diabetes, schizophrenia, insomnia, multiple sclerosis, and opioid use disorder. I’ll be eager to see how it does over the next couple of years.

I was also interested to see a write-up of research on using an AI-powered wearable to improve function for patients with essential tremor. I have relatives with the condition, and it can significantly impact quality of life. The Felix NeuroAI device  is considered investigational but was shown to reduce tremors and improve the ability of users to perform daily activities by delivering electrical stimulation to the peripheral nerves in the wrist. Additional research is being conducted at the University of Kansas School of Medicine. Of note the company that makes the device was founded through the University of Minnesota, so here’s to cool tech coming from the Midwest.

I’ve taken a cautious approach to using real-world evidence in my practice, making sure that I’m using it in conjunction with traditional evidence-based recommendations. Those of us who have been in practice for a while know the risk of the “everyone’s doing it” approach to medicine (Vioxx, anyone?) rather than ensuring that the risks of new treatments don’t outweigh their potential benefits.

For drugs that are already in broad use, however, real-world evidence can be useful to identify adverse effects and unanticipated outcomes. A recent study looked at three GLP-1 receptor agonist weight loss drugs, examining adverse events. They found that one drug had significantly fewer reports of adverse drug reactions , but another was associated with some serious adverse events, including suicidal ideation and vision loss. It remains to be seen whether these results will be flagged to help develop larger or more comprehensive studies, but they’re important, nonetheless.

One of the most rewarding elements of my work as a consultant specializing in EHR optimization was identifying non-value-added steps in workflows and eliminating burdensome documentation that couldn’t be clearly linked back to a regulation, official requirement, or quality measure. A recent study in The Permanente Journal addressed the misinterpretation of regulations by compliance professionals. The authors presented 16 study subjects with five clinical scenarios and scored their interpretations for variability of interpretation. Only one-third of the subjects had formal training as a compliance professional, which I found interesting. As the authors presented the scenarios, they found that given the same scenario, some subjects identified noncompliance where others voiced no concerns.

One of the scenarios presented was the bane of many healthcare workers, namely whether food and drink can be consumed in work areas. Others included order entry by non-physicians, compliance with HIPAA requirements, the need to document a pain assessment, and whether physicians have to document the history of present illness independently. If you’re finding that your organization has workflows that have “always been done that way” but no one can link them back to a requirement and there’s an easier or better way to do them, it might be time to push back and ask for a review with the goal of removing such burdens. The last thing that burned out care teams need is overzealous interpretation of requirements or enforcement of those that don’t exist.

I was excited to learn that one of the states where I am licensed is implementing new functionality in their Bamboo Health-powered Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) system. Prescribers will now be able to see a risk score for unintentional overdoses that takes into account the different drugs for which a patient has filled prescriptions as well as the duration of those prescriptions and the number of pharmacies at which they’ve been filled.

My primary practice is in a state where this is not yet implemented, but then again, we don’t even have the PDMP integrated into the EHR. Even though we have to log in separately, the system has still helped me identify concerning patterns for a number of patients in my care. It’s also been used in my state to identify physicians behaving badly, so I’m grateful to have a system that helps protect my patients and colleagues from those who might do unscrupulous things.

Yesterday was National Healthcare Decisions Day, which was created to encourage patients and their care teams to discuss advance care planning. I hadn’t heard of it before this year and was amused to learn that the April 16 date was selected with a famous Benjamin Franklin quote in mind: “In this world, nothing is certain except death and taxes.” Individuals are encouraged to do their US taxes by April 15 and review their health care directives the next day. The observance was founded in 2008 and encourages not only patients and providers to participate, but also community groups, healthcare facilities, and religious organizations. More information is available at The Conversation Project, which is part of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement.

I’ve seen enough things in my medical career to know that I never want to be without a document that details my wishes for care (or lack thereof). When I arrived at the hospital for what could be one of the most medically risky events in any woman’s life, the labor and delivery nurse acted stunned when I handed her a copy. She said it was the first time she’s seen one from a patient. Let’s normalize talking to our families and loved ones about our wishes and help them to document theirs.

Do you have a living will, advance directive, or healthcare power of attorney? If not, why? Leave a comment or email me.

Email Dr. Jayne.

Curbside Consult with Dr. Jayne 4/14/25

Mr. H currently has a poll in the field, courtesy of this week’s Monday Morning Update, that asks, “What’s your biggest red flag when evaluating a health IT vendor?”

Of the listed response options, my top two include “Leadership team is all career investors or executives” followed by “Lists no real customers, just pilots.” By way of additional suggestions, I would add “Leadership team has no idea what the average person experiences when they have a health-related need.” This answer was brought into the spotlight for me this week, as I had the opportunity to interact with a large number of ladies at a senior women’s seminar.

I normally try to downplay the fact that I’m a physician when I meet people I don’t know, because I don’t want to field the resulting clinical questions. However, in this situation I was a presenter and the person doing my introduction mentioned it, so I couldn’t escape it.

Once that proverbial cat was out of the bag, I heard a lot of healthcare stories, ranging from heartbreaking to inspiring, and a couple that spawned ideas for innovation. For those of you who don’t have a lot of real-world healthcare experience but are operating in this space, I give you my guide to understanding what a random sampling of what people want to talk about concerning healthcare when given the chance. 

At the first meal break, I was asked where I practice. I explained about being a virtual physician, thinking that my tablemates might not be familiar with it. The first person that spoke wanted to know, “What do you think about the fact that Medicare is going to stop paying for online doctor visits, because I’m pretty mad about it.” Talk about a softball being dropped right in my lap.

She went on to explain that in her Arizona community, many of the residents are elderly, some no longer drive, and certain specialty care is a 2.5 hour drive away. She and her husband have been having virtual visits for the last several years, only going in person once a year or when a specialized test is needed. They are able to have labs drawn at a satellite draw site for one of the nationwide lab vendors. She has been able to avoid long hours on the highway as well as the hassle of getting her mobility-impaired spouse into the car.

The conversation segued from there to the need for non-traditional home services. Another mentioned the fact that her local emergency medical services agency’s funding shortfall led them to start charging for any calls that don’t result in transportation to the emergency department.

She was worried about a couple of things. First, people may not call for help when they need it, resulting in them “winding up sicker than they need to be.” Second, there’s a gap in providing services that are important but non-emergency. The example she gave was when someone falls and needs help to get up, but doesn’t need to go to the emergency department. This happened to one of her neighbors who called her, and when the weren’t able to find a younger neighbor to help, they ended up calling 911.

This immediately gave me an entrepreneurial idea — like a ride share service, but for things like this. I did a quick online search and most of the answers to “how to safely pick a loved one up after a fall” involved calling 911 or the fire department for a “lift assist,” which may or may not have an associated charge. What if there was an app where you could summon an available person who is not only physically capable of providing this kind of assistance, but has also has had their background checked and vetted by a third party so that seniors would be more comfortable calling them?

I’m seeing an opportunity for off-duty healthcare workers to make some cash in a way that they’re comfortable with, but that requires no charting and has few hassles. Kind of like TaskRabbit but with a personal assistance twist and with rapid access.

Maybe it could also have a “schedule in advance” component for non-urgent calls, again kind of like a ride share service, when you don’t need to move a person but just need to move that box of cast iron skillets so you don’t break your foot (which also happened to one of the ladies at my table who was in a walking boot). There may be some variations of this out there, but none that I’m aware of has the breadth of availability that would be ideal for a growing population of aging seniors.

From there, the conversation flowed to the predictable topics, including physicians who always run behind, long waits for new patient appointments, the hassles of dealing with insurers, expensive medical bills, and whether or not I watch medical TV shows. Nearly everyone at the table had used a patient portal to communicate with a physician at least once, and about half of those have received text messages from medical providers. All of them had smartphones and didn’t hesitate to pass around pictures of the grandkids, the great grands, or their various craft projects.

They were universally comfortable with using the internet to find information, whether it was for a health-related topic or just to find out general information. It was validating to see this in person since I run into a lot of people who still think that seniors aren’t technology savvy.

My dinner table assignment had several retired healthcare workers who each had something to say about the current state of things. A correctional health nurse midwife said that the greatest need is for better behavioral health services and supports “to keep people out of prison in the first place.” A retired physical therapist from a VA hospital was extremely vocal about the need to make sure that our veterans are taken care of and that any cuts at the VA should be done thoughtfully and “not in some all-fired hurry.” Another was a nurse who medically retired sooner than she would have liked. She was most excited to learn about virtual nursing opportunities, which might have allowed her to stay in the field longer.

All of them had EHR experience and thought things were better in some ways and worse in others when EHRs came to their facilities, which many of us agree is a fairly accurate statement. All three had children or grandchildren who were in the medical field, so that gave me a little bit of hope as far as healthcare still being a desirable career choice.

Vaccines were a hot topic among those who weren’t healthcare retirees. One of my dining companions told the story of when she received one of the first polio vaccines and “people were lined up around the block because it was a horrible disease and there wasn’t a single mother who didn’t want her children to take that sugar cube.” She was an amazing dinner companion, a retired university professor who has traveled the world and had stories that made me hope I’ll still be globetrotting into my eighties as she is. She ended up accepting my LinkedIn request about an hour after I sent it, which impressed me. She doesn’t have any content associated with her profile, which adds to her mystique, I guess. No need for self-promotion in that generation.

At the end of the meal, there was a raffle with proceeds going to a family that has three children with medically complex needs. Hearing the raffle chair tell their stories was incredibly moving. I can’t imagine navigating the healthcare system with one of their situations, let alone with three. It was gratifying to see several thousand dollars raised to support them.

These are things that average people in the US want to talk about when they find out that you’re in healthcare. If you’re a healthcare technology leader and none of these resonate with you, it might be time to obtain some experiential learning through hanging out with people who consume a fair amount of healthcare resources. It might confirm your thinking, give you new ideas, or give you something to think about that you haven’t considered. If nothing else, it should remind you that there are humans on the other end of your solution, whether they’re patients, family members, care delivery team members, or those who support them. And as leaders, if you don’t have a clear line of sight to those people and understand how your solution impacts them, you might just have some work to do.

What kinds of things do you hear when people find out you’re “in healthcare?” Leave a comment or email me.

Email Dr. Jayne.

EPtalk by Dr. Jayne 4/10/25

An article in Nature Medicine caught my eye this week. It examined the results of a tool that looks at real-time data for patient deterioration. These kinds of tools have been under evaluation for a while, but this one differs from some of the other ones out there because it looks at the content of nursing notes as opposed to the laboratory and vital signs data that are used by many other options. The Communicating Narrative Concerns Entered by RNs (CONCERN) tool was found to reduce sepsis risk by 7%, length of stay by 11%, and risk of death by 35%.

The study was conducted across two health systems with 60,000 hospital encounters and took place in 53 acute care units and 21 intensive care units. Examples of data that were found in nursing notes that wouldn’t otherwise be captured by some predictive tools include subtle mental status changes, changes in the tone of narrative comments, or increased frequency of nursing surveillance.

I would be curious to see the study taken a step further to look at how the tool performed based on the relative tenure of the nurses who are documenting the notes. We’re continuing to see a tremendous drain of bedside nursing experience and it would be helpful to have that kind of evidence to use when seeking funds for nursing retention initiatives.

From Jimmy the Greek: “Re: blood cleaning. This piece seems like the perfect thing to make Dr. Jayne shake her fist at the wind.” How could I pass up a clickbait headline like, “Clean blood is trendy, if you can afford it” when it’s served to me on the proverbial silver platter? Long story short, a London-based startup is looking to capitalize on microplastics fears with their $13K blood cleaning service. It sounds a bit like dialysis, but with a machine that removes microplastics “and other undesirable chemicals” from blood plasma before returning it to the body during a roughly two-hour session.

Claims abound as far as what the process is supposed to do, ranging from helping with chronic fatigue and long COVID to improving sleep. Although we don’t know the full risk related to microplastics, I was unable to find any high quality clinical trials that showed benefit from this approach in treating any diagnosed condition. Like other unproven interventions such as full-body scans, stem cell injections, and various unproven supplements, the only sure thing about this solution is its ability to part consumers and their cash.

I attended a seminar this week that featured several presenters who are from government-related entities. One agency in particular has put new rules in place such that everything that will be seen by an external audience has to go through a legal review. Despite having started the process a few weeks ago, the presenters from that agency were not able to get approval for their presentation, which covered some scholarly research on AI tools. They had no choice but to cancel, which was unfortunate as there was quite a crowd waiting to see the presentation. I wish the organizers would have been able to communicate this in advance, but I suppose that the presenters were hoping for a last-minute approval that never came.

I was able to connect with one of them between sessions later in the day. They mentioned that they’re attending the conference using vacation days and paying for it out of pocket because their agency will no longer cover travel to educational meetings. They’re actively seeking a new role because they’ve been told that if they stay, their work will be subject to censorship, which sounds like a way to get people to resign without actually terminating them. They were reluctant to say much more than that as they fear for their job and the wellbeing of their subordinates. Hopefully they will be cleared to present their work in the future because it sounded interesting enough to those of us in the packed meeting room.

I was able to slip into another session that was running at the same time and heard one of my former medical school classmates speak, which was great since I haven’t seen him in years. We’re all older and some of us are a bit grayer, but he still gives the same “nutty professor” vibe that he had while we were in school together. It has served him well over the years as he has received multiple teaching awards from his institution, where he’s been a fixture since residency. If we had created class predictions I don’t think I would have picked him as a long-term teacher, but after sitting through his lecture, I can understand why his students love him.

I also had the opportunity to catch up with a classmate who left her hospital-owned practice and set up shop as a direct primary care physician. She’s only been in that arrangement for a couple of years but is already making the same salary as she did as an employed physician while demonstrating higher clinical quality scores with less stress. Her panel of patients has gone from 2,500 to 500 and she spends between 30 and 60 minutes for each office visit. She’s about to add a second physician to the practice and mentioned that she had more applicants for the role than she thought she would see. The majority of her patients have high-deductible insurance plans coupled with healthcare spending accounts that make a direct primary care practice more appealing.

She mentioned the cost savings that she is able to pass along to her patients through her laboratory and pharmacy arrangements and I was shocked at how she’s able to deliver care with that level of cost effectiveness. It sounds like the majority of her patients are middle income, but find her care model to be a better value than traditional insurance as far as not having to take as much time off of work and being able to get all their needs addressed during a single longer visit compared to having to come back multiple times or see additional specialists. Talking to her was quite a contrast from what we were hearing from the mostly academic speakers, but I’m glad we were able to connect.

Are you part of a direct primary care, concierge, or retainer practice? Would you recommend it or not? Leave a comment or email me.

Email Dr. Jayne.

Curbside Consult with Dr. Jayne 4/7/25

I spent the majority of this weekend training to use a new electronic health record system and completing practice onboarding.

I’m going to be doing some per diem work at a local practice. It is busier than it wants to be, but not quite busy enough to support adding an additional physician. The practice needs additional coverage, especially before and after their physicians have scheduled vacation. Those are windows of time that usually end up overbooked, as physicians struggle to see people before they leave town or face an overloaded schedule when they return.

They are also looking for inbox coverage and possibly some acute care coverage during the vacation. It’s an ideal scenario for me because the physicians typically schedule their vacations six months in advance. That gives me plenty of lead time to build my consulting engagements around those weeks. I’ll also be doing some coverage here and there during the intervening months to become familiar with how the office runs.

The practice uses a fairly well known EHR. They signed me up to watch some online training modules first. I’ve used so many different EHRs over the years that I didn’t expect anything earth shaking as I sat down with my laptop and a nice cup of tea.

The first thing that struck me as I logged into the learning management system was that they had assigned comprehensive training to my profile, which included a broad swath of specialties that I don’t practice and won’t be covering. I called the office manager to make sure that this was intentional since family medicine uses a lot of the subspecialty templates. It wasn’t immediately clear whether that choice was made by the office or the EHR vendor.

Since I was being paid for the full time that was needed to cover all the assigned courses, I didn’t want to spend more time arguing about it. Not to mention that I figured that it would be a great way to see what vendors are developing and whether there’s anything new.

I had the practice’s training environment open while I was watching the modules. I have found that to be the easiest way to handle content, such as personalizing the physician workspace or setting up medication favorites. I learn by doing, so I was surprised that following the prescribed learning plan meant sitting through almost 90 minutes of content that didn’t contain anything that was remotely interactive. It reminded me of the old-school training I used to see when I was first doing informatics work, with a deluge of material that just droned on and on.

I’ve had enough experience working with people who are well versed in adult learning theory to know that this isn’t ideal. The voiceover for the training almost lulled me to sleep several times. I decided to switch from tea to my favorite coffee concoction, which is jokingly referred to as rocket fuel by those who have sampled it.

I have to say that this level of caffeine jolt was sorely needed. I ended up having to wade through specialty documentation with no way of fast forwarding or indexing to the part covering templates that would actually be of use to me. For example, the OB/GYN content wasn’t subdivided by template or visit type. I’m not going to be doing any obstetric visits, but do need to know what content is available for acute GYN problems.

I ended up just letting the video run its course and randomly surfing through the content that was available in the training environment, learning in a more hands-on way. I’ve done enough locum tenens and per diem work over the years that if I can document my top 15 most common visits, I’ll be good to go for at least the first day and will eventually pick up the rest of the workflows I need to know.

I was somewhat surprised when I arrived at the coding and billing part of the documentation template. It didn’t seem to be taking into account the newer coding guidelines that went into place a couple of years ago. The suggested codes were easy to override, but it gave me a bad feeling about the vendor in general, as if they weren’t keeping up with the times.

I couldn’t figure out how to see what version I was using or when the last update was, so I jotted those down as questions for my next conversation with the office manager. It also didn’t look like the Health Maintenance guidelines were totally up to par, because the recommendation for RSV vaccination for non-elderly adults wasn’t current, either. That’s a newer item, so I could see how it might be coming in a future upgrade, but  not having it in the reminders would be a bit of a pain for clinicians.

Day 2 was filled with completing all the practice’s HIPAA, Conflict of Interest, Ethics, and Fraud / Waste / Abuse training. I’ve done so many of those over the years that I can just about recite them. I can also generally predict the clinical scenarios that are going to be used. As someone who has worked in so many different places, I have a dream of a training passport that would exempt people from having to do the training at every new place, but I know organizations like to put their own spin on training.

I’m always on the lookout for a module that will top the wildest one I’ve ever seen, which I had the pleasure of watching when HIPAA first came out. It was a badly acted video with mafia overtones, kind of likening the idea of violating HIPAA to a brush with organized crime. It was so bad, but so attention getting, that nothing has really topped it yet.

I also had to fill out a ridiculous amount of credentialing paperwork, which I haven’t had to do in a number of years. Fortunately, I had a copy of the last packet that I had to complete, so it was straightforward. although tedious. Once I turn that in, they’ve assured me that I will be granted access to the production EHR. Then I can see what’s really in there and start the process of making sure that I have all the shortcuts enabled that I can, such as medication favorites, quick phrases, and other preferences.

It’s always fun to get those things set up. It reminds me a bit of getting your backpack ready for that first day of school. Even though it’s not as cool as a 64-pack of brand name Crayola crayons, I’m pretty hyped about going for my first day. We’ll see whether the reality meets the expectation in a few weeks.

What’s your favorite “first day of school” memory? Leave a comment or email me.

Email Dr. Jayne.

EPtalk by Dr. Jayne 4/3/25

I finally have some solid data from the recent residency match, as administered by the National Resident Matching Program.

For those who might not be familiar, this is where medical students indicate where they want to do their residency training; training programs indicate who they want to fill their allocated number of training slots; and an algorithm tries to bring them all together. This year’s match had 52,409 applicants, for which only 47,208 submitted a final rank order list. The candidates were competing for 43,237 positions. At noon Eastern time on match day, all the applicants learn where they’re going to be for the next three to seven years.

Different medical schools handle the big reveal in different ways, with some handing out sealed envelopes for class members to open privately. Others throw blowout match day celebrations complete with “walk-up” music like you might see at a major league baseball game, followed by live reveals as candidates open their notices. The latter can be a difficult environment for those who didn’t get their top choices, but everyone still acts thrilled regardless.

Those who didn’t match were notified earlier in the week and have the opportunity to compete in The Supplemental Offer and Acceptance Program (SOAP), commonly referred to as “the scramble,” where unfilled slots are offered and candidates have only two hours to accept a potential offer. If you saw a graduating medical student with their phone glued to their body March 17-20, chances are they were part of the scramble.

It’s a brutal process for those who have been through it, although some of my classmates who had top scores were largely unfazed. The final match data can be telling as far as what students think about a particular specialty, and following the worst parts of the COVID-19 pandemic we saw a significant drop in matches to emergency medicine as students saw what that specialty had become. After experiencing an 81.8% fill rate in 2023, emergency medicine rebounded to 95.5% in 2024 and landed at 97.9% for 2025.

Primary care specialties ended up with a 93.5% fill rate, even with an increase of 877 in the positions available. Family medicine matches fell from 87.8% to 85.0%, which means that we will continue to have shortages in that specialty for years to come. Unless healthcare payment policies change (and workloads shift), we’ll continue to see a decline as students choose specialties with higher compensation and better work-life balance.

I had dinner with some friends last week, and one of them was showing off her Oura ring. She and her husband bought matching rings in an effort to use data to determine who was more disruptive during sleep. The company has been working to improve its sleep tracking algorithm, and although it’s better than competitor devices, it’s still not as accurate as formal polysomnography. Although it will probably be good enough to force one of the parties to consider seeking medical help, it’s not classified as a medical device, nor is it approved to diagnose, treat, or monitor health conditions. If you think your bed partner has apnea or another serious condition, it is best to see a licensed professional.

In another discussion, a friend asked me about this article on Gather Health, which aims to provide primary care services with a focus on keeping older patients out of the emergency department. Founded by an emergency physician who was tired of seeing patients seeking care in high-cost facilities when it could be better managed elsewhere, over 2,500 patients are enrolled, with the majority being covered by Medicare and Medicaid. The company has raised $17 million in funding and hopes to break even in 2025. The company pairs office-based care with home health, remote patient monitoring, and social opportunities to improve patient outcomes.

The article mentions revenue forecasts of $44 million this year. It hopes to expand from four to 17 sites in Massachusetts. Of course, when venture capital is involved, there’s an expectation that the services will yield a profit, and it would be interesting to learn more about how much money they think they can make on something like this. I’m not against people making a profit, but it’s the extreme focus on profitability that I’ve seen create a lot of issues in healthcare delivery organizations. Nearly every physician gathering that I attend features at least one horror story related to private equity or venture funding of care delivery organizations.

Caring for complex elderly patients is expensive and challenging. The company’s founder also served as chief operating officer of VillageMD, so it will be interesting to see what he does differently with this endeavor. From the patient perspective, I wish the company well and will be interested to see how it performs over the next few years.

The Open Payments program is a national system that creates transparency around payments made to physicians from drug companies, device manufacturers, and other regulated entities. Each spring, data is released so that physicians can review what is associated with their name and potentially dispute anything unexpected. It’s been many years since I attended so much as a drug company lunch, so I was surprised to see a significant amount of money posted against my name for the recent reporting period.

I’m glad I reviewed it, because the entry was from a company I don’t associate with and was tagged with a nebulous “food and beverage” category for a single event in the first few months of 2024. I’ve opened a dispute about the entry and hopefully it will be resolved quickly and with a minimum of extra work on my part. If you’re a provider subject to reporting, it might not be a bad idea to take a look at your account. Even if I’m unable to resolve it, my understanding is that my record will be flagged as “disputed,” which is good because I hate to break my record of perfect zeros.

Mark your calendar for the next DEA National Prescription Drug Take Back Day on Saturday, April 26. Communities will be holding collection events, often at local police departments or other health facilities. Unwanted and expired medications are a health hazard and also pose risks to the environment when people dispose of them incorrectly. Fortunately, my local law enforcement agency has a box that’s available for drop off around the clock, and I made good use of it when a relative passed away, leaving behind a cache of pain medications with a street value in the thousands of dollars. The program has collected 19 million pounds of medications over the years, which is pretty impressive.

Email Dr. Jayne.

Curbside Consult with Dr. Jayne 3/31/25

As someone who is knee deep in healthcare on a daily basis, there are a lot of things going on in the world that I follow with varying levels of attention. Sometimes these move more into or out of focus depending on the kinds of consulting engagements that I’m doing.

For example, if I’m working on quality improvement projects, I do a lot of reading to make sure that I’m up on the current metrics. If I’m working on a project involving order sets, I make sure that I’m up on the latest and greatest guidelines and treatment plans for whatever conditions I’ll be addressing.

As an HIStalk contributor, I try to keep up more broadly with everything that is impacting healthcare and healthcare IT as a whole, including worldwide health conditions, new scientific discoveries, emerging technologies, and where organizations are spending their money, whether they’re hospitals, healthcare systems, solution vendors, or independent physician practices.

There are dozens of other CMIO and CMO level consultants who are in the same position. Most of us are also keeping a close eye on what’s happening in government, especially where it comes to changes in staffing levels for the Department of Health and Human Services, the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and similar state-level organizations.

Changes in those organizations have a trickle-down effect on the patients who have trusted me with their care, along with every other person in the US. With changes to the US participation in the World Health Organization and withdrawal of funding for global vaccination programs, changes to health policy in the US also impact people around the globe.

These changes have also impacted me as a patient. I recently learned that a clinical trial to which I have been accepted has lost part of its funding. I have met the qualification criteria, but they aren’t randomizing any new patients into cohorts.

It has been months since I started the process to be part of this trial. It was an emotional rollercoaster as I went through the qualifying process, having to send medical records from multiple institutions and hoping they not only got there in a timely fashion, but were accurate and not full of a bunch of EHR-generated nonsense.

Once all the records finally made it there and were reviewed, I went through an intake process that included genetic counseling as well as testing beyond what I’ve already had. I’ve received the results and was in the final stages of being assigned to a trial arm, only to have the rug pulled out from under me.

When people talk about the “waste” in clinical trials in hyperbolic and abstract ways and imply that funding cuts were deserved, it makes my stomach clench. I’ve spent a significant amount of my professional career doing process improvement and eliminating millions of dollars of waste from healthcare organizations, so I know what waste is. I know how to identify programs that aren’t running efficiently and those that are doing well. I know how to lead change and how to strip significant dollars out of organizational budgets in a compassionate way.

None of that has ever been done by just walking into a hospital or health system and announcing sweeping cuts without any consideration whatsoever. There are consultants who do that, but I’m not one of them, nor will I ever subscribe to that philosophy.

Many of the clinical trials that are being impacted by slash-and-burn cuts affect real live patients. We’re not fruit flies in a lab, or some futuristic technology that someone just cooked up to draw down funds.

Fortunately, the study in question has multiple sources of funding, including a number of private ones, so it hasn’t had to shut down completely. Those who were already randomized into a cohort will continue to receive the intervention to which they’re assigned. It’s just the rest of us that are in limbo. I’m happy that it’s continuing to run because hopefully I’ll be able to benefit from the results of the study once they’re known, but watching this unravel has been truly depressing.

When you agree to participate in a trial, you realize that you might receive “standard care” and not the intervention, and you have to come to terms with that. Now I’m definitely receiving standard of care, and it’s not the missing out on the intervention that I’m really sad about as much as having been excited to participate and to be able to make some kind of good come out of my situation. Not to mention that the results of this trial will impact women for decades to come and may yield a change in direction for the care that is received by millions of mothers, sisters, grandmothers, aunts, and daughters.

Some of you may be asking, “What does this have to do with healthcare IT?” or commenting that I’m on my soapbox again. Indeed, I’ll admit it. After nearly 1,500 posts that span more than a decade, I reserve the right to share the patient experience, even if it is my own. I also reserve the right to write about things that might be construed as “political” when they impact patients, because everything that impacts patients is in my physician lane. I will also keep calling out waste when I see it, whether it’s in the form of unnecessary testing and treatment or the misalignment of healthcare resources, incentives, and technologies.

I think that all of us that work in healthcare IT have the opportunity to do better and be better when we consider how our daily actions can impact patients in our world, our nation, and even our neighborhood. We are literally all connected in ways that we might not imagine.

I have a friend who sells interventional radiology solutions that are highly reliable and come from a trusted manufacturer. Physicians prefer them to the competition and feel they they support higher-quality procedures. When he gets tangled up in his company’s sales processes, he focuses on a mutual friend who recently had a procedure that falls within his solution’s scope. He reminds himself that even though he doesn’t like some of the things he has to do in his job, they need to be done to get the best solution to the point of care in more places every year. With the assistance of this mindset and keeping the patient at the center of his work, he routinely meets his company goals, and when you hear him talk about his job, it’s easy to understand why.

There’s an episode of “The Simpsons” called “And Maggie Makes Three” where Homer explains why there are no pictures of Maggie in the family photo albums. He tells Bart and Lisa that the pictures are where he needs them, which is in his office at the nuclear power plant. They cover some letters on a company placard to change “Don’t forget, you’re here forever” to “Do it for her.”

Let’s all remember why we do what we do and remember that there’s a patient on the end of every decision, and eventually we will all be patients. Be aware, be informed, and be involved in understanding what happens in industry segments other than your own. When you’re the one on the exam table in 10 or 20 or 30 years, you’ll be glad you did. 

Email Dr. Jayne.

EPtalk by Dr. Jayne 3/27/25

It looks like I’m one of the users who have been selected to test the beta version of the new Amazon Health AI digital assistant.

According to news articles, the tool is designed to field health and wellness questions, and of course to suggest products. Some responses have a “clinically verified” indicator that shows that the information has been “reviewed and confirmed as accurate by medical experts.” I couldn’t find any indication of their definition of “experts,” which can vary widely. It also didn’t indicate how often such information is reviewed or how long ago this particular excerpt was reviewed.

I tried a number of scenarios, including questions about an ongoing cough and a query about what a measles rash looks like. For the cough question, it suggested that I might be interested in purchasing Lipton tea or an over-the-counter inhaler.

For the measles question, I was shocked that it answered the question by providing a correct answer, but for a different question than the one that I actually asked. If I’m asking what a measles rash looks like, I would expect to see a photo of a measles rash (there are dozens out there that are easily accessible from search engines) rather than a description of a vaccine-associated rash.

Initially, when I read the answer, I missed the word “vaccine” because I skipped over the regurgitated question directly to the bullets. I would want to read more carefully next time. I also thought it was odd to add a disclaimer about “while I cannot provide an exact cause for your symptoms” when I didn’t indicate that I was asking about symptoms. I was just asking a health educational question, so the system isn’t sophisticated enough to understand that and probably assumes everyone has a symptom. Users have the ability to provide feedback on the responses, so you can bet I gave that one a thumbs down.

Next, I specifically asked whether the tool had a picture of a measles rash. It apologized for not having an image, but then went on to again discuss a rash that is related to a measles vaccine. It then offered me the opportunity to join Amazon One Medical, which I guess is not surprising.

I also asked how to care for a sprained ankle. The output was missing key information in the form of sentences that didn’t populate correctly: “Over-the-counter like or can also help manage pain and inflammation.” I guess the model forgot to throw in medication names like “acetaminophen” or “ibuprofen.” This search generated a suggestion that I may be interested in buying an elastic bandage as well as visiting Amazon One Medical. I repeated these questions in another search engine and frankly got better answers, so overall I’m going to give Amazon’s new tool a D-minus. Try again, folks.

From Primary Care: “Re: this article Did you see this article in JAMA Network Open? It talked about the fact that states with less regulation of health insurance offerings have higher rates of diagnosis for late-stage cancers. I don’t understand how people can see this data and not think we need payment reform or overall healthcare reform.” I can’t say that I’m surprised. Here’s the full scoop: the study looked at 1.3 million patients in states that had either no regulations or limited regulations on short-term, limited-duration (STLD) insurance plans. These are sometimes purchased by patients who are between jobs or who lose coverage for other reasons. They’re usually pretty poor plans and have waiting periods and other elements within the policies that essentially discourage the patient from receiving care. They typically have high deductibles and high out-of-pocket costs for patients. They are not compliant with the Affordable Care Act (ACA) requirements, which results in higher patient responsibility for tests that would have been fully covered by an ACA-compliant plan.

The study was led by the American Cancer Society and looked at adults aged 18-64 years who had a cancer diagnosis between January 2016 and February 2020. It covered 47 states plus the District of Columbia and used information from the National Cancer Database. States were classified as to whether they prohibited these plans before and after 2018, stopped them after 2018, allowed them with restrictions, or had no additional regulation of the plans. The study adjusted for social and demographic factors, year of diagnosis, and state random effect.

The authors found that in states with no additional regulations of STLD plans, there was a net increase of 0.76 percentage points in late-stage cancer diagnoses compared to those states that continuously prohibited such plans. States with some regulations had a net increase of 0.84 percentage points compared to those with continuous prohibition.

The authors concluded that “the 2018 federal policy loosening restrictions on STLD plans was associated with an increase in late-stage cancer diagnoses in states without or with inadequate additional STLD plan regulatory protections. Findings were consistent among cancer types with recommended screening tests (i.e., female breast and colorectal cancers) and extended prior research conducted in a limited number of states, underscoring the importance of state policies and federal efforts to limit STLD plans.”

This illustrates the difference between allowing healthcare and healthcare finance to be regulated at a state level versus at the federal level. The latter would promote more consistent care delivery across our population. Looking at my own state, the level of education of many of our legislators varies greatly and very few have any firsthand experience with healthcare policy. The year is 2025 and I can’t believe we haven’t gotten on board with the idea that everyone in the US deserves high quality healthcare and that a state patchwork of rules isn’t going to do that for us.

Doctors’ Day is March 30 in the US, celebrated on the day when ether was first used for general anesthesia back in the 1840s. It’s on a weekend this year, so hopefully hospitals and healthcare institutions are planning to do something either before or after. It’s been a while since I worked anywhere that had any kind of formal recognition of the day, so if you have doctors in your life, please consider doing something nice for them or at least just wish them a Happy Doctors’ Day.

How does your organization celebrate Doctors’ Day? Is there a pizza party or a challenge coin involved? Leave a comment or email me.

Email Dr. Jayne.

Curbside Consult with Dr. Jayne 3/24/25

Mr. H was correct in his assumptions around what I would think about Function Health, the celebrity-backed company that offers subscriptions to lab tests.

I checked out their website and the first thing that annoyed me was the use of “insights,” which has become quite the buzzword over the last few years. What exactly does “insights from top doctors” mean? Are they sharing high-quality, peer-reviewed research findings, or are these just their opinions? How do they even define “top doctors?”

Just looking at their “all-in-one for everyone” laboratory test menu makes me cringe. The vast majority of these tests haven’t been proven to be useful for screening average-risk people. Selenium testing, anyone? Selenium deficiency is extremely rare in the US and Canada, except among patients who are undergoing dialysis and occasionally in patients with HIV. But sure, let’s test everyone and hope for the best, and let the beleaguered primary care physicians sort it out when a patient’s results flag high or low in a clinically insignificant way.

News flash: although it looks like it’s included on their home page, it’s actually an add-on test that costs extra, which to me adds an element of bait-and-switch for the customers who aren’t going to do the six additional clicks needed to see the lists of tests.

Most patients don’t understand that “normal” lab values are defined statistically. For that reason, people will be outside the accepted range even though their levels are probably just fine for them as a human. In fact, we don’t really use the word “normal” for most blood tests – we use “in range” and “out of range” unless it’s a critical high or low. Back when I was in med school, the students at my university were used in a project to revalidate the reference ranges for cholesterol tests. I can guarantee that based on our eating habits, we probably weren’t the best population to use for that effort.

We often see confusion when patients look at the results of chemistry panels and their values are a decimal point above or below the cutoffs. Usually those calls result in a phone conversation that is at least 10 minutes long, which takes away time from patients with actual issues who need care.

Other labs included in their testing panels are ones that are tricky to interpret in the face of patients with symptoms, let alone when ordered on a patient with no symptoms. Immune-related labs are the most common of these and can be vexing to patients to the point where we in the primary care trenches only order them when we’re trying to rule a disease or condition in or out of our diagnostic process. They will be “out of range” or mildly abnormal in quite a few patients, which is why you want to avoid ordering them unless the results will change your diagnostic or management plan.

I’m sure that some patient engagement advocates have thoughts around this, but I’ve been in this exact patient scenario and encouraged my own physician to only order the tests that were specifically indicated. I didn’t want to go down any other diagnostic rabbit holes chasing spurious abnormalities that weren’t going to drive the management of my particular situation in a productive direction.

Also in this scenario, the patient has no idea of the education, training, or reputation of the physicians or midlevel providers who may be reviewing their results. I personally like to know who my providers are and where they trained to ensure they’re not low quality. There are plenty of random physicians who will literally do this kind of work for $8-$10 per chart regardless of their qualifications, so buyer beware.

The company also offers the Galleri multi-cancer detection test as another extra-fee add-on. This can be useful, but is best performed after a patient receives appropriate counseling to understand the implications of having been tested for certain conditions or of receiving non-negative results. There are supposed to be laws protecting us from genetic discrimination, but in reality there are plenty of ways in which they can impact a person negatively.

One sneaky trick is not asking patients for the results of their genetic testing, but asking if they’ve ever been tested for a particular condition and then using that information to negatively impact the insurance underwriting process. I’m not an attorney and don’t know if it’s legal, but I’ve seen it. And if you’re in the military and seeking certain job roles, the presence of testing can disqualify you even with negative results. I had to write an appeal letter for one of my patients in that situation, and unfortunately it was not successful. Alzheimer’s risk testing is another one that falls into this bucket.

Other add-on tests are those related to food allergies. Let me tell you about the case that happened in my home town, where a patient died as the result of inappropriately ordered food allergy testing. It’s been written up in the literature and I wasn’t a treating physician, so not a HIPAA violation for those who might be concerned.

The pediatric patient ate peanut butter daily with no issue. However, their physician ordered an overly broad food allergy testing panel that said they were allergic to peanut butter. The parents immediately banned peanuts from the house. Months later, the patient was exposed to peanuts elsewhere and had an anaphylactic reaction and died. How does that happen? The patient had been orally desensitized to the allergen through daily consumption, which protected them. (We actually do this now intentionally with kids with severe peanut allergies, starting with microdoses and working our way up.) When they stopped that daily protection, a life-threatening allergy was now in play. To summarize, a poorly considered lab test that never should have been ordered killed this child.

Although this offering is a subscription service that offers all this testing for one low price, guess who pays for all the follow up of the abnormal tests? You and I do, in the form of increased insurance premiums, since it’s almost certain that people who need additional testing and medical visits to explain it all will do so on their commercial or publicly funded coverage. We also pay for it through an increase in unnecessary visits to follow up these findings, which reduce access to those who actually need care.

I experienced this personally when I was in traditional primary care practice and Quest Diagnostics launched their direct-to-consumer testing site. The site mentions that “clinicians call you promptly if any urgent results arise,” but I’m betting those clinicians who are making the phone calls are medical assistants, patient care technicians, or medical secretaries and not actual licensed clinicians. I doubt there will be a physician on the other end of the line to answer your questions.

There are also some interesting findings in the FAQs, including that Function is considered “beta” and is “not yet fully developed” and “there will be rapid changes with occasional bugs.” This would not be allowed in mainstream electronic health record or laboratory management software in this day and age. They try to absolve themselves through a disclaimer that they are a healthcare tech company and not a medical or laboratory provider, and that all the real work is done by independent third parties.

The FAQs also note that the company is jumping on the AI bandwagon and “aims to apply machine learning algorithms to your lab test results over time, in order to uncover things that humans are likely to miss.” Regarding privacy, the site notes that patients can delete their data and no personally identifiable information will be shared, but it doesn’t address any concerns about them selling de-identified or otherwise aggregated data, which I would bet they are.

Like the commenters on Mr. H’s post, I’d also like to see a copy of the clinical summary and how they interpret unnecessary tests. Maybe we should start a HIStalk fund drive to sponsor a reader to sign up in exchange for sharing their experiences throughout the course of the year-long subscription.

What do you think about Function? Is Matt Damon’s endorsement enough to lure you in? Leave a comment or email me.

Email Dr. Jayne.

EPtalk by Dr. Jayne 3/20/25

Google Chief Health Officer, Karen DeSalvo, MD, MSc blogged about six health AI updates that were recently covered at the company’s annual The Check Up event. Top on the list was “helpful health results in Search.” She notes that since the debut of AI Overviews, users are “asking longer, more complex questions” and states a goal that health-related overviews will “continue to meet a high bar for clinical factuality.”

It still surprises me when I hear my physician colleagues using Google to look up medical information compared to using a more validated healthcare-specific resource. I certainly wouldn’t want to be on a witness stand explaining where I got my information, as opposed to a peer-reviewed journal article or a national consensus guideline.

She also notes the release of medical records APIs in Health Connect, allowing systems to leverage core medical elements such as allergies, medications, immunizations, and lab results via FHIR. Another item highlighted is the company’s FDA clearance for the Loss of Pulse Detection features on the Pixel Watch 3. It can generate a call to emergency medical services if the wearer is unresponsive. It’s apparently been available in the EU and will roll to the US later this month.

Fourth on the list is an “AI co-scientist” that is intended to “help biomedical researchers create novel hypotheses and research plans” after combing through the scientific literature. Development partners include Imperial College London, Houston Methodist, and Stanford University. Not included in the writeup is the Oxford comma, which I have compulsively added to the list.

Fifth is TxGemma, which aims to speed AI-enabled drug discovery. The solution can manage text as well as molecular structures. I have zero experience with that technology, but it brought back not-so-fond memories of building hydrocarbons during organic chemistry, which represents eight college credit hours of my life that I will never get back.

Last on the list is a tool called Capricorn, which is designed to support the rapid identification of personalized cancer treatments through the integration of public medical data and de-identified patient data. It is supposed to synthesize the literature along with potential treatment options. It is being developed in partnership with the Princess Maxima Center for pediatric oncology in the Netherlands. It will be interesting to revisit these solutions in six, nine, or 12 months to see which of them show real promise and whether any of them have fizzled.

Another Google feature that wasn’t covered in the story and about which I am less than enthusiastic is the “What People Suggest” search feature that will allow patients to “search through online commentary from patients with similar diagnoses.” Patient experience is certainly important, and patients can be powerful advocates and support systems for each other. However, just because another patient with a similar condition was treated in one way doesn’t mean it’s the right treatment for another patient.

It’s a rare patient care day that I don’t see information patients have researched on the internet or from patient forums, and a good chunk of it is irrelevant to the patient in front of me. It takes a great deal of time to have these discussions with patients and quickly becomes untenable for primary care physicians who are carrying panels of thousands of patients. Patients become frustrated when they learn that treatments advocated by others may not be standard of care or in fact might be harmful. I wish we could spend some public health dollars helping patients learn how to better analyze the information they see on social media and the internet, but we all know there aren’t enough public health dollars as it is.

A recent article in Science reviews an AI tool that can evaluate blood samples and determine the likelihood of infections, autoimmune diseases, or the response to a vaccine. It looks at the genes that code for B and T immune cell receptors and was able to identify patients with COVID-19, HIV, type 1 diabetes, lupus, those recently vaccinated, and those who met none of those criteria.

I found immunology to be one of the most interesting topics in my medical school curriculum, although I struggled with it due to a professor who really didn’t want to teach students and made it clear he preferred to be in the lab. Discoveries like this might just make me want to learn more about it again.

Good news from a payer (for once): Optum Rx, which is part of UnitedHealth Group, has announced its intention to update prior authorization requirements for 80 prescription drugs. Although several news articles about the announcement used the phrase “remove prior authorization requirements,” it’s not exactly what it sounds like. From what I understand, the modifications planned will impact “reauthorizations,” which is where a physician has to obtain approval to continue a drug that a patient is already taking. This is explained in the press release with examples.

A “necessary” reauthorization might occur for “drugs that have safety concerns, need ongoing monitoring for dose adjustments, require additional tests, or may have alternative therapy considerations.” Those that will be reduced are for drugs where “there is minimal additional value in reauthorizing an effective, lifelong treatment.” They expect a 25% reduction in reauthorizations. No list of drugs was provided, so I wonder if they haven’t fully identified the list yet or whether they’re keeping it to themselves in hopes that some requests will experience attrition during the process because physicians are simply exhausted.

I enjoyed reading a recent commentary by NYU Grossman School of Medicine ethicist Art Caplan, PhD. He was reacting to Elon Musk’s request that patients upload copies of their medical imaging studies to help train his Grok AI solution. I often read Caplan’s editorial pieces and respect his straightforward take on issues. He notes that AI hallucinations are real, and “If you go out and take random information submitted by a subpopulation of people, not representative of everybody, you’re going to get many false findings.”

He goes further to discuss the perils of not knowing the attributes of a particular image, such as whether it’s accurate, the demographic characteristics of the patient, and more as far as being able to have training data where bias is mitigated. He also notes that there are no assurances of privacy for any images that are sent.

My favorite quote from his comments is this: “The last big issue is, why should we be doing this for free? Elon Musk is a gazillionaire. If he wants information, why doesn’t he go out and pay a representative sample of people to undergo tests, establish what a normal baseline looks like, and then try to explore what disease baselines look like? That’s what we need to have good automated technology to help diagnosis — and note that I said help it, not replace it. If there’s no baseline and people are just randomly firing in medical tests, you’re not going to have an accurate AI diagnostician; you’re going to have a mess.” Thanks for telling it like it is, Dr. Caplan.

What do you think of the idea of crowdsourcing medical images for an AI training dataset? Leave a comment or email me.

Email Dr. Jayne.

Curbside Consult with Dr. Jayne 3/17/25

In this week’s Monday Morning Update,  Mr. H launched a poll that asks about reader strategies to reduce the time spent in meetings that are less than productive.

After a couple of decades in healthcare IT, with many of those spent working on large and lengthy projects, I feel like I’ve attended more than my share of unproductive meetings. I can’t wait to see the poll results, but here are my recommendations for productive meetings (most of which are directly related to having high performing teams, so I’ll include those too).

• Consider making meetings shorter than standard blocks. I’m a huge fan of having 50-minute meetings rather than hour-long ones, or 25-minute meetings rather than half-hour ones. This approach provides attendees time between meetings to prepare and arrive promptly for the next.
• Start meetings on time with no apologies. One of my favorite hobbies is to calculate the cost per minute when people start “just a few minutes late to allow others to arrive.” I’m regularly in meetings with high-level executives and multiple external consultants where the burn rate is in excess of $3K per hour. Every minute counts in those situations.
• Be mindful of small talk and whether it’s good for your team dynamics. If team members are stressed about other projects or a previous meeting, odds are they may not want to hear about what everyone did over the weekend.
• Have an agenda before the meeting is scheduled. No agenda, no meeting.
• Distribute any key materials that will be discussed with the meeting invitation and agenda. There’s nothing worse than trying to read and understand things that are brand new to you while someone is also talking about them and presenting slides that may or may not summarize the concepts.
• Use time-boxed agendas to keep people on track.
• Assign specific meeting roles. including timekeeper and scribe. The latter can be outsourced to AI tools, although a human scribe should still proofread it and make any necessary corrections.
• For standing meetings with a designated set of regular attendees, consider creating a Team Operating Agreement that defines how the team operates and how it handles team members that either don’t participate or that tend do monopolize the meeting. This can enable the team to self-police and discuss when people aren’t interacting with the group at the expected level. Many of us hated group projects when we were in school, and having a Team Operating Agreement is often a good antidote to bad behavior.
• As you’re creating your Team Operating Agreement, be mindful of how you want to manage video calls and people who are not on camera. I’ve been in plenty of meetings where people have been called out for not being on camera and not in a nice way. As a consultant who has worked in dozens of organizations over the years, this can be a minefield. Maybe someone wants to turn their camera off to blow their nose, eat their lunch, or just decompress for a few minutes because they’ve been on for four hours straight. These should all be OK. If you’re concerned about someone being excessively off camera, address the issue privately.
• If you’re working across multiple time zones, there’s a good chance that you’ll be scheduling during someone’s typical lunch time. Consider identifying these as camera-off meetings to allow people to eat lunch without having to apologize about it. Back in the days when I was in an office full time at a health system ,we routinely had brown bag lunch meetings and everyone ate in front of each other, so it still feels a little weird to me that people have to apologize for taking care of a basic physical need.
• For meetings that are hybrid with some attendees in person and some remote, make sure someone knows how to operate the cameras and screens effectively so that everyone feels like they have the same level of participation and engagement. The same thing goes for telephones and audio hookups.
• For meetings where people are expected to deliver status reports, require them to submit those reports in advance and distribute them to the group along with the agenda (you might see a theme here). Then you can do a speed round of “any questions” and reduce the likelihood of conducting a meeting that should have been an email.
• If decision makers or required participants are not in the room, reschedule. Don’t waste everyone’s time going through an agenda if it’s all going to have to be repeated in a meeting after the meeting.
• Learn how to use your calendar’s scheduling assistant. If you need to send an invite outside someone’s typical work hours or when they have a conflict, ask them if they can shift their workday before scheduling the meeting. Even if you can’t accommodate an individual, the fact that you at least asked / discussed the issue goes a long way towards building a good working relationship as opposed to just sending people appointments at 4am in their time zone without any recognition of the fact that it might be inconvenient.
• If you’re going to do a presentation during a meeting, make sure you know how to share your screen and how to either enter presenter mode or how to share your slides through your meeting app. There’s nothing more distracting than watching a side deck being delivered by clicking through the editable presentation.
• Allow for a recap at the end of the meeting where action items and their owners are reviewed. This helps prevent surprises.
• Make corrected minutes / notes available within one business day, while people still remember at least some of the meetings they attended.
• Consider having “no meeting” blocks where colleagues have dedicated time to actually get their work done and honor these blocks like they are sacred. I’ve seen plenty of organizations put these events on their calendars and then schedule right over them, so it does take a certain amount of cultural commitment to actually make it happen.

There you have it, folks. It’s like a free hour of management consulting from someone who has definitely been there and done that. In the meantime, visit the poll and let us know how you tackle the issue of unproductive meetings. If you have a great story to share, leave a comment or email me.

Email Dr. Jayne.

EPtalk by Dr. Jayne 3/13/25

It’s rare for me to see patients without having at least some discussion about the cost of care. Patients usually want to know if the medication I’ve prescribed is a generic, or if they’re in a high-deductible health plan, whether it’s going to be cheaper if they use GoodRx or another discount program.

I trained in a place where generic prescribing was not only encouraged but expected, so many of these conversations are fairly straightforward unless I’m having to recommend a second- or third-line medication after others haven’t worked, or if I’m stuck prescribing one that I know tends to have coverage issues. Patients are becoming more financially savvy when it comes to healthcare costs, which is good considering that patients in the US borrowed $74 billion to cover healthcare costs last year. The US leads the world in medical bankruptcies, and according to recent data, nearly a third of patients are “very concerned” about the possibility of medical debt.

EHRs have become better at embedding data about drug pricing, sometimes putting it at the point of prescribing. This can be cool when implemented well, but when implemented poorly, it’s annoying. For example, if most of the medications that I prescribe cost less than $15 because they’re generic, I really don’t want to see warnings telling me that the drug is going to cost $6 or $8 or whatever it is. EHR-embedded data is also less than helpful when it doesn’t take into account things like deductibles or coinsurances or patients who have both primary and secondary insurance coverage. Maybe we can put some AI resources to work making that information more actionable and also more accessible.

The University of Michigan is planning to reach rural patients through the use of AI-powered mobile clinics. The aspirational goal is one where “general practitioners with AI help could make diagnoses, run and interpret tests, and perform procedures like specialists.” The project is in partnership with the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) and would use vehicles “equipped somewhere between a doctor’s office and hospital.” Even without consideration of the AI element, the devil is in the details for something like this. What kind of lab services will be performed? Is it considered a moderate complexity lab? What is the location of service? How will regulators think about a facility that is constantly on the move?

Those interviewed in the article note that AI agents would “coach” physician assistants and nurses to performed more advanced procedures. I’d like to offer a wild solution to help increase the numbers of advanced procedures that are done across the US. How about we allow family physicians (MDs and DOs) to perform the procedures for which they were trained?

I trained in a high-acuity residency program and developed the skills to perform a variety of outpatient surgical procedures, endoscopies, and even C-sections. But there’s not a hospital in a 100-mile radius that would allow me to have privileges to perform any of those unless I’m a member of a residency program’s faculty. It seems that if we could leverage the skills that highly trained physicians are actually mastering during their training, we could help more patients without the expense of developing and implementing AI. Just a thought. But of course, AI is a lot sexier than allowing family physicians to operate at the top of their licensure, so there you have it.

I was excited to learn that progress has been made in having state licensing boards and hospital credentialing offices remove certain questions from their applications that raise the risk that professionals won’t seek mental health services when they are needed. The Dr. Lorna Breen Heroes’ Foundation has been instrumental in promoting this effort to reduce the stigma of mental health issues among licensed clinicians. The foundation honors the memory of Dr. Lorna Breen, a long time emergency physician who died by suicide during the spring of 2020 while serving on the front lines of COVID. Many of us were in very dark places during that time as well as during other points in our careers. Thank you to the foundation for working to make sure that physicians can get help when they need it rather than worrying whether they will lose their licenses.

I missed this article the first time through the inbox, but I was glad to have caught it later. An original investigation that was published in JAMA Network Open looked at “Clinician Experiences With Ambient Scribe Technology to Assist With Documentation Burden and Efficiency.” The study follows roughly four dozen clinicians at the University of Pennsylvania Health System during two months in 2024, when they were using the DAX Copilot AI tool. Interesting tidbits: while use of the tool correlated with improved efficiency, reduced cognitive burden, and improved patient engagement during appointments, there was “mixed feedback regarding the length and quality of ambient scribe-generated notes.” Some users noted high error rates, but it’s unclear if that has any association with clinician subspecialty since there were 17 specialties represented among the 46 participants.

Notes were about 20% longer, which isn’t always a good thing, although sometimes having more details can make the difference long term. Multiple clinicians felt that the time they spent editing the notes balanced out any time savings during the workday. One of the most interesting tidbits, at least for this data nerd, was that net promoter scores (NPS) were all over the map. Thirteen clinicians were promoters, 11 were passive, and 13 were detractors, leading to an overall NPS of zero. It’s certainly not the overwhelming victory that those who are paying for it were likely hoping for.

I’d love to see this kind of project reproduced in single-specialty cohorts, matching for patient complexity and other factors. I’d also like to see it done at more than one academic institution. Another study limitation was the fact that all participants opted in, which certainly doesn’t reflect how I see physicians embracing (or not embracing) new technologies in the real world.

Have you personally used ambient documentation tools, and what did you think of them? Leave a comment or email me.

Email Dr. Jayne.

Curbside Consult with Dr. Jayne 3/10/25

As a primary care physician and CMIO, I understand the importance of measuring things. We measure quality metrics, efficiency metrics, and various other factors to improve healthcare

During the early days of EHR adoption, long before the Meaningful Use years, I would encounter physicians who were against expanding the use of metrics in our physician group. We only had a small number of things we were measuring at that point – antimicrobial stewardship, appropriate testing for strep throat, patient satisfaction score, and a couple of other things. No more than five or six. However, physicians were concerned that we would start measuring a host of other things that would make their lives difficult, arguing that their patients were sicker and that having to demonstrate quality would detract from the care of those complex patients.

Fast forward a few years to the Meaningful Use days. The whole country was incentivized (or forced, depending on how you look at it) to start measuring many more elements. Fortunately, our EHR was long established and we were already delivering high quality care, so it was fairly straightforward to add a few metrics here and there to meet the regulatory requirements. We made sure as many processes were embedded in the workflows as possible and offloaded the vast majority of data capture to support staff so that our physicians didn’t become data entry clerks.

“I’ve seen the consequences when clinicians apply clinical guidelines to patients for whom they don’t make sense.. As we developed EHR training documents for upgrades and updates, I always made sure that we reinforced how clinicians can exempt patients or exclude patients from certain measures. Following the appropriate process in the EHR makes sure that providers aren’t penalized in the numbers for doing the right thing for a patient even though it sounds like it’s contrary to the guidelines. Usually, providers indicate a reason for the exclusion, which quality folks and researchers can use to understand why people aren’t being included in the measurements.

People ask how quality guidelines can be hurtful, so I’ll give an example. If you’re a patient who has had cancer, and who has had the offending body part removed, you need to be excluded from future screenings of that body part. If you no longer have a colon, you do not need a colonoscopy. I’ve been in enough patient support group meetings to hear stories that no one should ever have to hear, especially when there’s an easy way to make sure they don’t get reminder messages that add to their trauma.

This is important for organizations to understand when they are designing the reports that generate these reminders. There are ways to not only look at the exclusions, but also to look at elements of the patient’s history to reduce the risk that you’re prompting patients for services or tests they don’t need.

Guidelines that are applied too strictly can also cause patient harm in other ways. I was visiting an elderly relative today at her independent living community to drop off a prescription that was missed by her usual delivery service. She mentioned that she had been eating her meals in her apartment, which is a departure from her usual pattern of going to the main dining room in the evenings. She has had intermittent issues with social isolation since being widowed, so I wanted to find out more about what was keeping her from going to eat with her friends.

It turns out that her primary care physician doubled one of her diabetes medications, resulting in some digestive distress that’s worrisome enough to keep her in her apartment. I asked what her diabetes numbers looked like and we took a trip into her patient portal, where I confirmed that her hemoglobin A1c had indeed gone up, representing higher average blood sugar levels over the last few months.

Her last visit note, which was clearly captured using ambient documentation, noted the fact that she had consumed a three-pound jar of peanut M&Ms between Thanksgiving and Christmas, likely leading to elevated blood sugars. Bonus points to the ambient solution for capturing many of the details, as my relative is certainly a talker.

However, the note also contained what I would describe as a mini-lecture about “the importance of tight glucose control in preventing the 10-year complications of diabetes.” I thought that was funny, because this patient is just a few years shy of 100 and has had negligible complications of her diabetes, which is of fairly recent onset. She’s as healthy as a proverbial horse from a physical standpoint, but she’s at real risk for worsening depression, which has made her nearly housebound in the past.

I know her primary care physician personally, having trained him on his first EHR a decade ago, but it made me wonder a bit about what he is thinking with her care. Is he just following algorithms to drive that hemoglobin A1c to goal come hell or high water? Or does he not have a lot of experience with nearly 100-year-old patients who have different risk/benefit profiles than younger patients? Does he know that driving blood sugars too low is a much bigger risk in her age group? Does he not see depression as a risk factor in the same way that her family does? Does he see patient values and preferences as part of the decision-making process? And if they had a risk/benefit conversation and she declined to take the higher dose of medication, would he know how to adjust things in the EHR so that his paycheck won’t be impacted by her lack of tight glucose control? Having worked in the same system for years, I know how to do the exclusion, but suspect he might just be running a bit on autopilot.

My relative and I worked together to send a patient portal message to the care team outlining her symptoms and the fact that she’s been essentially isolated since the medication change. I’m glad that I’ll be able to follow along with any replies and adjustments in the portal. We joked about the situation with the peanut M&Ms, and I suggested that maybe she should fill a separate pill box with her daily ration of treats so that she can enjoy them, but not overdo it. I hope that I’m doing as well as she is if I make it to her age, but it’s important for her to be able to enjoy every day since the next one isn’t always promised.

If you make it into your 90s, what food would you use to treat yourself regularly? Leave a comment or email me.

Email Dr. Jayne.

From HIMSS with Dr. Jayne 3/4/25

Although Monday had been overcast, Tuesday dawned clear and cool but without the winds of the weekend. After declining the $14 croissant at my hotel, I found a nearby Dunkin where I could satisfy my sweet tooth via a donut with spring-themed sprinkles. It was a quick walk to the convention center, and from what I understand, that took about half the time that it took to arrive on the HIMSS-sponsored shuttles.

I had a chance to visit with Edifecs #2451about their #WhatIRun campaign. This year’s shirts feature Audrey Hepburn. I enjoyed hearing about the company’s efforts to empower women in the workplace and around the world. They’re a friendly bunch and great to talk to, so be sure to drop by.

From there, I was off to meetings with clients and prospects. I made a few key introductions that will hopefully turn into future engagements. Although organizations have been fairly conservative in their spending lately, they are realizing that optimization and adoption projects have value, and if they are able to keep physicians from burning out, the cost savings can be enormous. As a boutique consultancy, I’m significantly more cost-effective than the big firms, so hopefully that will resonate as well.

The day was also full of booth visits. I thoroughly enjoyed my visit at PointClick Care #3454. Their rep, Tasha, is an emergency department nurse who clearly gets it as far as understanding how their solution can play a role in healthcare. The demo data they were using sent me right back to the days when I was working in the ER. She also was able to banter back and forth with my physician colleague even though we took her well off script, which is refreshing to see. Their demo data was great with a realistic portrayal of the patient journey, rather than a sanitized one, and I was glad to see their level of detail. It’s a slick solution to help clinicians understand where their patients might be seeking care other than with them. If you’re in the market for a tool that can bridge across disparate EHRs and other data sources to help you get a single picture of the patient, it’s worth a look.

If you’re less interested in tracking your patients outside of the hospital and more interested in knowing where they are within your brick and mortar establishment, I enjoyed learning about Kontakt.io #2250. They have what I can only describe as an RTLS on steroids, with the ability to track patients, staff, equipment, or any other assets using a variety of disposable or durable sensors. It made me reminisce about my days performing hospital rounds, when you could never guarantee the patient would be in their room and sometimes had to go back multiple times during the day to try to find them. The idea of using AI to take that RTLS data and do things like creating intelligent rounding lists has huge potential. Props also to the booth team that was clear, concise, and hospitable as they invited us to step out of the aisle and onto their plus carpet, which was much appreciated since we were well into a long day.

The footwear game was strong in the exhibit hall. I was envious of these animal print kicks.

Lightbeam Health had new corporate hosiery.

Relatient snuck in with a sharp shoe/sock combo.

Ultimately, however, the team from IMO won the day with this amazing entry.

I was happy to see sponsor CTG showing off their HIStalk credentials.

I found a corner of the exhibit hall that had edgier clinical solutions than I’m used to seeing at HIMSS. I declined the offer to stand barefoot on the body water analysis sensors even though they were being wiped down between patrons.

This vibrating light therapy cocoon was enticing, but I again took a pass.

Dr. Nick van Terheyden @drNic1 was brave and took the plunge in a red light therapy bed. He and I had a great time strolling through the booths looking at things like smart medication boxes to better enable remote patient monitoring, and of course, all things AI.

We were both impressed by the rep from Lightit.io, who engaged us and drew us into a conversation. It’s good to see sales pros on the floor. I liked their kicky luggage tags, which was the only piece of swag I picked up today.

The best booth of the day, however, was this one that was populated only by a screaming fax machine. It was attention-grabbing and nostalgic at the same time.

The day ended with some in-booth happy hours, and after that, I was ready for rest. Hopefully the rest of the trip to HIMSS will be as productive as Tuesday was.

From HIMSS with Dr. Jayne 3/3/25

It was a chilly opening day at HIMSS, punctuated by high winds and a splash or two of rain. The check-in process was smooth for those of us who had our barcodes at the ready. This year’s conference bag is definitely on the smaller side, with my hand model noting that it would probably make a good lunch bag.

Temperatures were in the low 60s, and people were fairly bundled up for the outdoor opening reception. HIMSS is under new management and the opening event wasn’t its finest effort from a food and beverage standpoint. Offerings were minimal (sliders, spring rolls, hummus cups with vegetables that weren’t long enough to scoop the hummus) and ran out early. Napkins and utensils were nonexistent.

Lines were long and the buffets frequently ran out of food, waiting for staff to bring more trays. Having worked as a “cater waiter” in a past life, it’s easier to work an indoor conference space because there are usually access hallways that let you replenish food from multiple points. In this arrangement, staff had to wade through the crowds to bring food to the buffets and could only do so from one side of the venue.

The entertainment consisted of circus-type acts and a band, which was good but so loud you couldn’t have any kind of sustained conversation despite the outdoor location. The hula hooping dancer was good, as was the performer in the mirrored suit balancing on a giant ball that he rolled throughout the venue.

As the evening unfolded, it became apparent that there weren’t enough trash receptacles or bus trays for people to drop off their plates, so they were piling them up underneath serving tables and on lighting stanchions. It felt more like a trip to the ballpark than a professional networking event. It’s a good thing the entertainment was solid because that distracted people from the fact that the food serving tables were broken down before the reception was even over.

Overall, I give the event space (which was basically a large concrete patio adjacent to the High Roller observation wheel) a B-minus and the food and beverage a solid C.

A reader shared this pic from inside the exhibit hall during setup. It looks like Epic’s iconic hanging butterfly artworks travel in style. I’ve been backstage at other trade shows but never at HIMSS, and from what I understand it’s a mammoth effort to get it all together. Can’t wait to see it in person tomorrow!

Email Dr. Jayne.

Curbside Consult with Dr. Jayne 3/3/25

One of my areas of focus this year is trying to be more mindful of the time that I spend online. It has been a challenging goal, because as a healthcare IT consultant, staying up to date on the industry is a major part of my job.

With that in mind, it’s more about using resources effectively and not being sucked into clickbait headlines or stories that aren’t going to somehow contribute to projects that I’m working on or knowledge I need to obtain. I spend a great deal of time following developments in AI since that’s a key topic for my clients. Still, it’s hard to keep up on everything even with search alerts and my own AI tools in support of those efforts.

I’ll admit I missed the introduction of HR 238, the Healthy Technology Act of 2025 that was introduced at the beginning of January. The bill was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and if passed, it would amend the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act to pave the way for artificial intelligence solutions to serve as practitioners, prescribing medications as long as states authorize the practice and it is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration.

Although there are AI solutions out there that are looking at delivering diagnosis information based on a clinical picture, and those that can suggest appropriate prescriptions based on drug data, I haven’t seen anything that pulls it all together in a cohesive fashion even at a base level. I definitely haven’t seen anything that also pulls in data on drug pricing, patient values, habits, and preferences, or any of the other dozen or so things that physicians regularly consider when we’re deciding which potential treatments to discuss with our patients.

Even if we had great AI tools that could cut through all of the data and noise that are out there, there’s also the human element of creating a therapeutic alliance with a patient and understanding how various comorbid conditions might impact a treatment that we’re suggesting.

Let’s take a simple example, like recommending that a woman over a certain age gets a certain amount of calcium every day. That’s a very simple recommendation that most EHRs can prompt us to do based on simple rules. First we need to assess the patient and determine if they’re already at goal, which may require teaching them about calcium in their diet and how to track it, plus motivating them to do so. If you have a motivated patient, they might track it for a week or two, but most tend to taper off.

Now let’s think about a patient who isn’t motivated to be concerned about their calcium intake. Maybe it’s a patient who is grappling with depression, anxiety, or worries that they’re going to lose their job. They might also have other health issues that are higher priority, such as the need to follow up on an abnormal cervical cancer screening test or to address high blood pressure that puts them at risk for heart disease. Add in the fact that they have a high-deductible insurance plan with crummy coverage that makes it difficult for them to afford the care they need and you have a recipe for a low likelihood to actually drive a change with that patient.

These are the situations that AI really isn’t equipped to address and that make up a good part of what many of us consider the “art” part of practicing medicine. Another important element of clinical care is managing the next steps after a recommendation fails.

Let’s take our calcium recommendation as our example again. Assuming we have a motivated patient who has tracked her diet, figured out she needs a supplement, and buys one after asking friends for recommendations. After a week of trying it, she’s having daily nausea and wants to talk to someone about strategies to either make it more tolerable for her to take the supplement or about recommendations for a different supplement. Is AI going to be ready to field those follow up questions, or will it be one more thing for a busy primary care physician to follow up on, but this time without the benefit of context and conversation at the time the medication was initially prescribed, like we have now?

Of course, this is just a very simple example, involving an over-the-counter dietary supplement and not even a prescription medication, but if we don’t have solutions that can handle straightforward clinical scenarios, we’re certainly not ready to be discussing actual prescriptive authority.

If we think that there is a shortage of people who can prescribe, there are other options out there that have good data behind them, such as expanded prescriptive authority for pharmacists who are managing specific conditions that range from smoking cessation to anticoagulation management. It’s tempting to just throw AI solutions at problems when we forget that there are already options that we haven’t taken advantage of, which helps remind us that we’re all likely suffering a bit from so-called “shiny object syndrome.” Not to mention that when one has a hammer, everything tends to look like a nail. Similarly, when people are dumping millions into AI solutions, it’s tempting to try to deploy them in places they don’t belong.

As for this particular bill, I don’t personally see it going anywhere anytime soon, based on some of the other priorities in government at the moment.

Speaking of priorities, I’m making my last-minute plans for HIMSS and trying to decide what makes the cut for my packing list, since temperatures are looking a little cooler than I had hoped. Still, it will be better than the freezing weather we’ve had in the Midwest for the last several weeks, so I’ll take the mid-40s to mid-60s any day. I’m looking forward to getting some much-needed sunshine (albeit through the screen of my usual SPF 50) as well as being out and about during the day rather than having to stay close to my desk for meetings and calls. I can’t wait to see my favorite HIMSS booth crawl buddies and to see what the wild and wacky world of healthcare IT has to offer us this year.

What are you looking forward to at HIMSS? Or are you happy to be at home while others brave the smoky casinos and hustlers handing out stripper cards? Leave a comment or email me.

Email Dr. Jayne.

EPtalk by Dr. Jayne 2/27/25

I’m deep into my HIMSS prep this week, figuring out what vendors I need to visit and of course which booths will be having the best happy hour offerings. I was excited to see that my friends at Edifecs will be running their #WhatIRun campaign again this year. The initiative highlights all the things that women “run” in the world, whether it’s meetings, departments, companies, projects, or carpools.

Especially for those of us in healthcare IT, it’s important to remember that women play a role in 80% of all healthcare decisions made, but only fill 19% of C-suite roles in healthcare IT organizations. If you’re at HIMSS, stop by and see them in booth 2451. If you’re not able to attend, share your story with the #WhatIRun hashtag and Edifecs will donate $1 to the brightpink.org in efforts to focus on women’s health.

I also downloaded the HIMSS app today after receiving notifications via email about people who were messaging me through the HIMSS platform. I get what they’re trying to do with their one-stop shop for communications, but it’s annoying. I don’t have time to keep up with appointments coming in through email, text, and now from the HIMSS app. I wish that colleagues would just stick with whatever usual method we use to communicate if they want to reach out about a HIMSS meeting. I live and die by my Outlook calendar, which is the single source of truth for where my body needs to be and what my mind needs to be doing at any given time.

I was interested to see that the HIMSS opening reception is being hosted at an outdoor venue this year. Although hopefully it will make for easier chatting than the traditional “try to yell over the music and entertainment in a cavernous ballroom” experience, the forecast for Monday is looking cloudy and cool. Temperatures for the rest of the event will runn mid-40s to mid-60s for us Fahrenheit-using folks.

Other than including comfortable but sparkly shoes that I’ve had picked out for weeks, I have no idea what I plan to pack. A fair number of my customers have adopted the low-key tech wardrobe with jeans, sneakers, and fleeces or other jackets. Several still tend to wear full business dress. We will have to see what inspiration the closet and the forecast give me. I think nostalgically about the days in my past life when I could just wear scrubs and running shoes every single day and no one batted an eye.

I’m still digging through the lists of sessions and presentations to figure out where I’ll be spending most of my time. I’ve long complained about the length of the lead time for HIMSS educational presentations, which results in the risk that content is outdated before it ever gets presented. I’ve identified quite a few good sessions to add to my list, but unfortunately, it seems like there are several good ones that are scheduled at the same time and then long gaps without anything in which I am particularly interested. I bought the cheapest badge this year so I won’t be getting the on-demand versions, but in the past, the quality has been low so it seemed like the right decision at the time.

Pet peeve of the week: One of my consulting clients asked me to sit in on a vendor demo this week as they begin the process to solve a pesky business problem. We were minutes into the demo when the sales rep bungled a couple of industry terms and company names. Rule of thumb: if you’re going to name drop, make sure you know how to pronounce the names of companies and products that you’re citing. If you’re going to use clinical terminology, make sure you are able to pronounce the words. Appearing as if you don’t know what you’re talking about is one of the fastest ways to lose credibility during a pitch. There are plenty of references out on the interwebs to help you learn how to pronounce pesky words. And for company names – if you’re in doubt, pronounce it the way the CEO says it. YouTube is your friend here.

A friend of mine who knows I’m a clinical informaticist but also knows I’m a huge fan of reading sent me this interesting piece on the intersection of ChatGPT and literature. It reviews recent work that looked at whether GPT was better at reproducing the style and tone of male authors than female ones, as well as follow up work that looked at other attributes of GPT-generated writings. The authors ultimately looked at 10 well-known 19th-century authors including Jane Austen, Louisa May Alcott, Charles Dickens, Mark Twain, and others. A generative AI tool was asked to create new works in the style of each. The authors noted that prompt writing was somewhat challenging, but were able to move forward. They also identified ways to classify the writings based on sentence length, selected words, and other factors.

Ultimately they were able to develop a model that was 99% accurate in identifying synthetic versus author-created texts. Interestingly, they also found that GPT was surprisingly good at imitating Mark Twain, which a higher proportion of synthetic writings being mischaracterized as authentic. The researchers plan to explore this further in a future phase of the project, but hypothesize that the phenomenon was caused by the fact that there isn’t as much Twain-adjacent material online compared to the other authors. Hopefully my friend will keep an eye out for the future research since it’s nearly impossible to keep up with everything going on in the world of GPT.

I recently completed a series of novels that seemed to have a break in the middle where it felt like a ghostwriter stepped in and the editors were AWOL. Characters changed names, plot elements morphed, and there was a lot of confusion. Was it GPT or just sloppy writing and editing? I wasn’t the only one who noticed the change, based on some online review sites. We may never know, but the idea of GPT did cross my mind.

Would you want to read a GPT-created novel in the style of one of your favorite writers? If so, what writer would be on the top of your list? Leave a comment or email me.

Email Dr. Jayne.