quote:

ORIGINAL: Aibo
@DesideriScuri: I hope we're agreeing here: reducing the health care cost by going proactive is of utmost importance, and regardless of what kind of framework it runs under. national or commercial or any mix - which is what we got currently where I am located.

quote:

One very interesting study have been done comparing the scene now that commercial alternatives have turned up - and that is that increased the overall cost. The conclusion of the study was that the commercial ones 'sold' unnecessary tests and treatments on patients since that is a way to earn more money.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB
If you are admitted to hospital in the UK with an illness that could be related to your obesity, you are offered advice regarding your weight as well as a support system to help you lose the lbs. All they are doing is offering that support and advice before you're admitted into hospital.

Why haven't they been doing this all along?

I don't know!!
I'm not going to get into a tit for tat debate with you DS because you don't get the British medical system, not because you haven't tried but because you don't want to. I honestly can't be bothered to argue with deaf ears.

Obviously, you're clueless about what I get and what I don't get.

Why does the NHS have to make a program for GP's to do this? My GP's have been doing this for the last 15 years. Why haven't GP's in the UK been doing this all along? The NHS started in 1948, right? Why has it taken 66 years to get the point where GP's are going to start keeping track of patient health markers?

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
You're missing the point again Desi....
Yes, the GP's keep track of things - but purely in a clinical sense.
So... (example) your BP rises and so does your cholesterol.... it is recorded in your notes.
You gain (example) another 20 lbs since your last visit - it is recorded in your notes.
Doctors have been doing this since day one in 1948... but it's all clinical data, not preventative.
What hasn't been recorded, until recently, are any recommendations that were made by your GP, what outside professional services were offered, whether you followed those recommendations or not and what the outcome was (if any).
Some doctors did, many didn't though.
That's the idea behind this latest health initiative - providing other health professionals with the GP's comments on preventative measures offered. Until this directive (to actually record it, and the results), most of that advice was delivered verbally because most GP's and clinicians assumed the patient repeated that advice to other healthcare professionals (which has become obvious that they didn't).
It is to provide consistency and reduce duplication across the board.
not just the bare clinical data, but also future prognosis, recommendations and plans for avoiding such events.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
You're missing the point again Desi....
Yes, the GP's keep track of things - but purely in a clinical sense.
So... (example) your BP rises and so does your cholesterol.... it is recorded in your notes.
You gain (example) another 20 lbs since your last visit - it is recorded in your notes.
Doctors have been doing this since day one in 1948... but it's all clinical data, not preventative.
What hasn't been recorded, until recently, are any recommendations that were made by your GP, what outside professional services were offered, whether you followed those recommendations or not and what the outcome was (if any).
Some doctors did, many didn't though.
That's the idea behind this latest health initiative - providing other health professionals with the GP's comments on preventative measures offered. Until this directive (to actually record it, and the results), most of that advice was delivered verbally because most GP's and clinicians assumed the patient repeated that advice to other healthcare professionals (which has become obvious that they didn't).
It is to provide consistency and reduce duplication across the board.
not just the bare clinical data, but also future prognosis, recommendations and plans for avoiding such events.

Recommendations have been part of recordkeeping for my GP's. I can't speak for any other GP in the US, nor can I speak towards my GP's actions for the rest of their patients.

Why hasn't that been the case all along?

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Inconsistency has been the problem.
And I daresay that also happens in the US too.
Some doctors record events religiously (as you expect they would), but many only recorded the bare necessities; the clinical data.
Whether that is because they hated the systems, didn't understand them, or pressed for time with a busy schedule, or whether the earlier systems just didn't provide the facility adequately enough, I have no idea.
The point is, they have now been mandated to record it all so whatever they recommend to the patient and what happens thereafter is down on record instead of some verbiage.
And, of course, if a patient starts developing, or starts to become a high risk of something, other preventative measures and/or meds normally reserved for those actually suffering a condition can get fast-tracked to treatment early before said condition actually manifests itself.
It's all in aid of promoting preventative practices/medicine in a more pro-active environment rather than waiting for a condition to happen and treating it reactively.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Inconsistency has been the problem.
And I daresay that also happens in the US too.
Some doctors record events religiously (as you expect they would), but many only recorded the bare necessities; the clinical data.
Whether that is because they hated the systems, didn't understand them, or pressed for time with a busy schedule, or whether the earlier systems just didn't provide the facility adequately enough, I have no idea.
The point is, they have now been mandated to record it all so whatever they recommend to the patient and what happens thereafter is down on record instead of some verbiage.
And, of course, if a patient starts developing, or starts to become a high risk of something, other preventative measures and/or meds normally reserved for those actually suffering a condition can get fast-tracked to treatment early before said condition actually manifests itself.
It's all in aid of promoting preventative practices/medicine in a more pro-active environment rather than waiting for a condition to happen and treating it reactively.

It happens in the US, too, I'm sure. Every health professional I've ever talked to (in professional settings or outside of professional settings) supports preventative medicine over reactive medicine. No matter what happens, though, it's still the responsibility of the patient to start the process, and to follow through with it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: LiveSpark

That's why I'm posting. I know that they are from the US, I'm trying to show them what a good thing programs like this one and the one I mentioned are a GOOD thing. Still far as I can see the US system has come a long way and I see "Obamacare" as a good first step in the right direction.

They think all govts are as controlling as the US govt is.. They wont see it as you and I do unless they move out of the US and actually experience the difference of living in a different country for themselves..

You may get the impression that the US system has come a long way but really, the lobbyists, Big Pharma, the greedy and HMOs, etc have just found a different way to milk patients, taxpayers and the system..

Assuming you are correct, it is that controlling U S government we are dealing with here not the perfect, compassionate Canadian government.
To paraphrase Carlos Mensia if Canada was so perfect why did you leave?

I never said it was perfect, its just a fuck of a lot better than this country.. I am not staying here, I am here just temporarily.. believe me, I cant wait to leave.. once I do I never want to come back.. The poor will continue to get poorer and the rich will get richer and there is not much American voters can do about that or their corrupt politicians.. This country is on a downward slide and that will continue to happen slowly over time and eventually the US will no longer be a "superpower" and the US dollar will no longer be the reserve currency..

Your hatred of the country shows in every post.
Just leave, you have that freedom even in as terrible a country as this,
You will not be missed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB
If you are admitted to hospital in the UK with an illness that could be related to your obesity, you are offered advice regarding your weight as well as a support system to help you lose the lbs. All they are doing is offering that support and advice before you're admitted into hospital.

Why haven't they been doing this all along?

I don't know!!
I'm not going to get into a tit for tat debate with you DS because you don't get the British medical system, not because you haven't tried but because you don't want to. I honestly can't be bothered to argue with deaf ears.

Obviously, you're clueless about what I get and what I don't get.

Why does the NHS have to make a program for GP's to do this? My GP's have been doing this for the last 15 years. Why haven't GP's in the UK been doing this all along? The NHS started in 1948, right? Why has it taken 66 years to get the point where GP's are going to start keeping track of patient health markers?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

It happens in the US, too, I'm sure. Every health professional I've ever talked to (in professional settings or outside of professional settings) supports preventative medicine over reactive medicine. No matter what happens, though, it's still the responsibility of the patient to start the process, and to follow through with it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

I guess I wasn't clear enough. My bad. I transferred my childhood dental records in the late 1990's to my current dentist. That just goes to show you that records have been kept and transferable for at least 20 years here, without the need for a nationalized health care system.

quote:

I transferred my childhood dental records in the late 1990's to my current dentist. That just goes to show you that records have been kept and transferable for at least 20 years here, without the need for a nationalized health care system.

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

I transferred my childhood dental records in the late 1990's to my current dentist. That just goes to show you that records have been kept and transferable for at least 20 years here, without the need for a nationalized health care system.

Unfortunately, your experience is not universal. One of the great challenges/frustrations of my medical misadventures has been trying to make sure the right records reach the right docs--sometimes within the same medical center.

ETA: Last time I was in the hospital, I figured they'd at least have contacted my oncologist and my wound surgeon, both of whom were on staff. That bubble burst one afternoon when my wound surgeon (seeing another patient in the unit) and I crossed paths. Her jaw dropped, and she was stunned to learn I'd been in-patient for almost a week at that point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LiveSpark

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

I transferred my childhood dental records in the late 1990's to my current dentist. That just goes to show you that records have been kept and transferable for at least 20 years here, without the need for a nationalized health care system.

Unfortunately, your experience is not universal. One of the great challenges/frustrations of my medical misadventures has been trying to make sure the right records reach the right docs--sometimes within the same medical center.

ETA: Last time I was in the hospital, I figured they'd at least have contacted my oncologist and my wound surgeon, both of whom were on staff. That bubble burst one afternoon when my wound surgeon (seeing another patient in the unit) and I crossed paths. Her jaw dropped, and she was stunned to learn I'd been in-patient for almost a week at that point.

Sorry to hear you're sick dc. I've been a medical secretary for 20+ years and in all that time I've never heard of a doctor being informed of a patient being hospitalized by anyone other than a family member. Of course that doesn't mean it doesn't happen but I've never heard of it happening. Did your family think to inform your surgeon? If not it's always a good idea to do it for precisely that reason.

Here in Quebec there is a new system in which everything that used to go into the chart (clinic notes, consult reports etc) are now downloaded into a system which gives all doctors access to info from all doctors who have seen their patients. From what I hear that has spread so that soon that info will be available to doctors all over Quebec. It works very well and seems to help doctors have a more complete record of everything that has happened with their patients.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB
If you are admitted to hospital in the UK with an illness that could be related to your obesity, you are offered advice regarding your weight as well as a support system to help you lose the lbs. All they are doing is offering that support and advice before you're admitted into hospital.

Why haven't they been doing this all along?

I don't know!!
I'm not going to get into a tit for tat debate with you DS because you don't get the British medical system, not because you haven't tried but because you don't want to. I honestly can't be bothered to argue with deaf ears.

Obviously, you're clueless about what I get and what I don't get.
Why does the NHS have to make a program for GP's to do this? My GP's have been doing this for the last 15 years. Why haven't GP's in the UK been doing this all along? The NHS started in 1948, right? Why has it taken 66 years to get the point where GP's are going to start keeping track of patient health markers?

Because we didn't have this problem 15 years ago

quote:

When I went to school there wasn't one overweight girl in my school, not a single one.
I came to America 18 years ago and I was horrified at the massive amount of morbidly obese people there were. These were people who were bigger than anything I had seen in my life. Its still very unusual to see someone over here as big as what you see them over their but its on its way, its going to happen. Obesity in the UK has struck us like an epidemic and I don’t think anyone here was ready for it.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB
And if they choose the help of a doctor, it won't affect later treatment if they do become ill from obesity.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
It happens in the US, too, I'm sure. Every health professional I've ever talked to (in professional settings or outside of professional settings) supports preventative medicine over reactive medicine. No matter what happens, though, it's still the responsibility of the patient to start the process, and to follow through with it.

the US patient also has to pay for it (weight watchers, jenny craig, etc).. in the UK the cost of the support to follow through will be paid by NHS, not the patient.. imo, that is a big incentive to join and change habits, etc...

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I guess I wasn't clear enough. My bad. I transferred my childhood dental records in the late 1990's to my current dentist. That just goes to show you that records have been kept and transferable for at least 20 years here, without the need for a nationalized health care system.

Of course you were clear enough, thats why I pointed out that was happening in the UK at least 60 years ago. You claim the 20 year ago figure like some badge of honour, for something those in the UK take for granted.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
You're missing the point again Desi....
Yes, the GP's keep track of things - but purely in a clinical sense.
So... (example) your BP rises and so does your cholesterol.... it is recorded in your notes.
You gain (example) another 20 lbs since your last visit - it is recorded in your notes.
Doctors have been doing this since day one in 1948... but it's all clinical data, not preventative.
What hasn't been recorded, until recently, are any recommendations that were made by your GP, what outside professional services were offered, whether you followed those recommendations or not and what the outcome was (if any).
Some doctors did, many didn't though.
That's the idea behind this latest health initiative - providing other health professionals with the GP's comments on preventative measures offered. Until this directive (to actually record it, and the results), most of that advice was delivered verbally because most GP's and clinicians assumed the patient repeated that advice to other healthcare professionals (which has become obvious that they didn't).
It is to provide consistency and reduce duplication across the board.
not just the bare clinical data, but also future prognosis, recommendations and plans for avoiding such events.

Recommendations have been part of recordkeeping for my GP's. I can't speak for any other GP in the US, nor can I speak towards my GP's actions for the rest of their patients.

Why hasn't that been the case all along?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
You're missing the point again Desi....
Yes, the GP's keep track of things - but purely in a clinical sense.
So... (example) your BP rises and so does your cholesterol.... it is recorded in your notes.
You gain (example) another 20 lbs since your last visit - it is recorded in your notes.
Doctors have been doing this since day one in 1948... but it's all clinical data, not preventative.
What hasn't been recorded, until recently, are any recommendations that were made by your GP, what outside professional services were offered, whether you followed those recommendations or not and what the outcome was (if any).
Some doctors did, many didn't though.
That's the idea behind this latest health initiative - providing other health professionals with the GP's comments on preventative measures offered. Until this directive (to actually record it, and the results), most of that advice was delivered verbally because most GP's and clinicians assumed the patient repeated that advice to other healthcare professionals (which has become obvious that they didn't).
It is to provide consistency and reduce duplication across the board.
not just the bare clinical data, but also future prognosis, recommendations and plans for avoiding such events.

Recommendations have been part of recordkeeping for my GP's. I can't speak for any other GP in the US, nor can I speak towards my GP's actions for the rest of their patients.

Why hasn't that been the case all along?

Most doctors do that. It's included in the plan portion of the notes which stays in the medical record. I always assumed it worked basically the same way over there, but from the comments I guess not.