Sep 6 2006
Transparency in the health care system "fosters trust, drives efficiency and advances quality" -- which "can be a good thing" for both patients and providers -- but programs that rate physician quality "need to be transparent too," Kenneth Peelle, president of the Massachusetts Medical Society, writes in a Boston Globe opinion piece.
Physicians currently have "little ability to respond effectively" to "potentially inaccurate, confusing or conflicting information" provided by such programs, Peelle writes.
According to Peelle, "Good data, provided in a meaningful way, show physicians and their staffs where they can improve their care or the operation of their practices," but "data that are difficult to understand, interpret or take action on become meaningless."
He concludes, "Physicians deserve a reasonable chance to review, understand and correct information before it's published. Equally important, patients deserve this kind of transparency as well" (Peelle, Boston Globe, 9/5).
 This article was reprinted from khn.org with permission from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Kaiser Health News, an editorially independent news service, is a program of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health care policy research organization unaffiliated with Kaiser Permanente.
|
Sexual minority adults more likely to avoid care on the basis of patient-clinician identity discordance