<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for Giuseppina</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/Giuseppina/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/Giuseppina/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 16:35:26 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: 6. Measurement</title><link>http://healthblog.xprize.org/2009/04/6-measurement.html#comment-10273269</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hoping not to sound too naive – but maybe the simpler perspective is to first define the "problem/s". It isn’t all about providers or incentives.   Personal accountability is paramount.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Giuseppina</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 16:35:26 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 6. Measurement</title><link>http://healthblog.xprize.org/2009/04/6-measurement.html#comment-10174286</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The idea of an X Prize aimed at improving outcomes in healthcare is tremendously exciting.  Personally, I am all for better, faster, cheaper…in anything!  But the more I visited this blog and the more I think about the ‘rules of the game’;  I come up with: “There’s just no way.”  There are way too many individual variables to take into account.  &lt;br&gt;Perhaps a way to approach such a contest would be to “specialize” in particular conditions, such as diabetes&amp;gt; the goal being the reduction of the A1c; or CHF&amp;gt;decreased hospitalizations; or medication adherence&amp;gt;medication adherence!  &lt;br&gt;I do believe we can do SO MUCH BETTER – and I do believe it takes a team.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Giuseppina</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 18:35:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 8. Teams</title><link>http://healthblog.xprize.org/2009/04/8-teams.html#comment-8691490</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I am in total agreement with Dr Brenner's first two suggestions on patient selection.  I would, however, caution going after "the sickest patients in a region." Alas, there are unfortunate situations that defy ethics and economics.  Some things we just cannot change.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Giuseppina</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2009 17:51:37 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 1. Introduction</title><link>http://healthblog.xprize.org/2009/04/1-introduction.html#comment-8691317</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I am very happy to see comments addressing the accountability of individuals for their own healtcare.  Too often I hear about "the insurance companies wanting to dictate care" or that we need to incentivize providers to do a better job.  So much of healthcare dollars are spent fixing what we could have prevented in the first place!  (And it costs nothing to stop smoking and take a walk!)  And I agree with Ron - we need to start with the kids!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Giuseppina</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2009 17:39:33 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 6. Measurement</title><link>http://healthblog.xprize.org/2009/04/6-measurement.html#comment-8690481</link><description>&lt;p&gt;What first came to my mind (upon hearing of the cohort of "10,000 files") was a 'case load' of individulas identified as "high risk" for high cost healthcare.  Criteria for this status would include recent/ongoing service/s utilization (hospitalizations, frequent ER use), health history (diagnosis of chronic illness such as diabetes, CAD/HTN, asthma/COPD), obesity, tobacco use, polypharmacy (especially large amounts of pain medications) and any other category for which education, life-style changes, access to care would be able to impact.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Giuseppina</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2009 16:38:17 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>