Healthcare ownership

Healthcare ownership Government financed insurance Regulated private insurance Unregulated private insurance... 

Pharmaceutical and healthcare companies may also find it beneficial to tailor particular sets of procedures to different types of systems. This may help ownership and adoption since different types of systems are usually supported by QA/laboratory, engineering, and IT departmental functions. From a technical standpoint, too, it is very difficult to make a single set of procedures easy to use while providing a practical level of detail to address the various technical characteristics of different types of computer systems. One size does not readily fit all. As a consequence, typically there might be four sets of validation procedures ... 

GxP regulations require that access to the software and relevant associated documentation should be preserved for a number of years after the system or software has been retired (see Chapter 4 and Chapter 11 for more details). Software licenses do not entitle pharmaceutical and healthcare companies to ownership of the software products they have purchased. All that has been purchased is a license, an official permission or legal right to use it for some period of time under defined conditions of use. Accordingly, some companies have established escrow (third party) accounts with suppliers to retain their access to software, but this is not mandatory. Access agreements directly... 

Pharmaceutical and healthcare companies have the opportunity to use validation to reduce the cost of ownership for the computer systems they use. The cost of validation of a project represents an investment that will be more than recouped in lower maintenance costs which, anecdotally, can be reduced by 50 to 80%. With maintenance perhaps responsible for half the lifetime cost, this could give a return on investment of 1 to 3 years. 

On the other hand, since it is patients who are responsible for their health, it is their best interest to ensure the availability and quality of their own records, invest in their own data, and take the ownership of the data as well as their own care as informed patients. Of course, patients may incur a fee to use clinical or public facilities to have their data digitized and updated. However, they are better off for improved healthcare due to improved data quality and availability of eHealth applications. By the way, a portion of cost savings to healthcare providers may be passed on to the patients to offset the costs. Furthermore, due to a widespread demand for record digitization and data entry as well as their storage and maintenance, there will be a market for a brand-new business sector specialized in these activities. Information capturing and use will gain efficiency due to the division of labor. 

Personal health record A PHR is also called a personally controlled health record (PCHR), or a personal electronic health record (PEHR), among others. This is a record of health owned and maintained by an individual—the emphasis on ownership and maintenance is important. Strictly speaking, PHRs do not include records owned or maintained by healthcare workers—those are called electronic medical records (EMRs) or electronic health records (EHRs). The distinction is sometimes blurred, as in cases of EMRs or EHRs to which the patients have access—those may be called integrated PHRs or tethered PHRs [1]. Also, PHRs are certainly not restricted to "patients," individuals who at the time are ill instead, PHRs are records of health maintained by mostly healthy, but sometimes ill, people. PHRs should contain the following ... 

Therefore, the information asymmetry constrains the patient from shopping aroxmd for price and quality. In addition, new technology is causing healthcare to mutate in different ways by broadening the span of the service delivery network, enabling patient-pulled services, segmenting the service markets, and altering ownership structure. 

As the healthcare system is extensive and complex, it presents opportunities for different business models to emerge. The possibilities include, emergence of niche providers, patient activation, innovations enabling process automation, shift from resource utilization to final outcomes, reconfiguration for accountability, new technologies such as electronic medical records, bundled payments, new medical devices that necessitate process reengineering, and government vs. private ownership of services and/or payments. 

Government ownership of providers Canada, UK (hospitals) US Veterans Germany us Private Healthcare... 

---