An EMR Update, a High-Risk Pool, and a Maze

Comments (5)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Devon Herrick says:

    It is somewhat perplexing to think Maine only has 14 people in its high-risk pool. On the one hand, you might be tempted to call the program a failure. But on the other hand, it’s come in under budget.

  2. Carolyn Needham says:

    Given the fact that a there was a strong emphasis on ensuring coverage for people with pre-existing conditions when pushing for passage of the ACA it is surprising that there would be a stipulation that subscribers must have gone without insurance for at least six months.

    What about someone who lost their job (and consequently their health insurance) 4 months ago. It seems incompatible with the stated aims of the proponents of the ACA to put subscribers through such loopholes.

  3. Bruce says:

    Maine. Isn’t that the state that wanted to socialize its health care system because there were so many uninsured people with pre-existing conditions?

  4. Brian Williams. says:

    Was it worth reorganizing the entire health care system to help 14 people in Maine (and a few thousand others scattered aroud the country)?

  5. Virginia says:

    I find the meaningful use article interesting, but not shocking. It amazes me how hard it is for hospitals to implement electronic records. Why is it that my $300 iPhone can do just about everything except my laundry and a hospital can’t keep track of my medications?

    I read a blog recently about a guy whose father coded his own billing and patient care software in the early 80’s. The guy has since retired, but he eventually had to go back to paper because of the regulatory issues related to patient records.

    It goes to show you that patient care isn’t that hard to handle. It’s all the other stuff that makes it impossible to have meaningful use.