Case Study: A 65-year-old woman was just been diagnosed with Stage 3 non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. She was informed of this diagnosis in her primary care physician’s office. She leaves her physician’s office and goes home to review all of her tests and lab results with her family. She goes home and logs into her PHR. She is only able to pull up a portion of her test results. She calls her physician’s office with this concern. The office staff discussed that she had part of her lab work completed at a lab not connected to the organization, part was completed at the emergency room, and part was completed in the lab that is part of the doctor’s office organization.
The above scenario might be a scenario that you have commonly worked with in clinical practice. For many reasons, patients often receive healthcare from multiple organizations that might have different systems.
As you review this scenario, reflect and answer these questions for this discussion.
What are the pros and cons of the situation in the case study?
What safeguards are included in patient portals and PHRs to help patients and healthcare professionals ensure safety?
Do you agree or disagree with the way that a patient obtains Personal Health Records (PHRs)?
What are challenges for patients that do not have access to all of the PHRs? Remember, only portions of the EHRs are typically included in the PHRs
Sample Solution
first experiments with RNG consisted of a radioactive source whose output would be converted into bits and stored on a computer. Computers allowed for true randomness and extremely tight control over experimental conditions. RNG solved many of the problems with dice experiments, removed many of the human elements that could not be controlled reliably. The testing procedure consisted of a random source providing a stream of output to a computer in 1s and 0s. The participant would press a button triggering the computer to measure the current output of the random source, e.g. radioactive decay and record the data electronically alleviating any possibility of human tampering. Testing could also be done in large quantities and very quickly making data very easy to collect by means of RNG. Drift did need to be accounted for in the random sources, however. There was also one human aspect of the experiment that there would be no way to account for, which is stopping testing could be stopped as soon as the data reached a point of statistical significance. Proponents of PK had many issues with the use of RNG for testing PK. They argued that the power of PK is not able to be used on such a small level as the microscopic part of a computer and the quantum mechanics in place. However, with no better way for reliably recording accurate and controlled data RNG because the primary vessel for PK testing. There were still many issues regarding how the tests were performed. In the case of Dean Radin and Roger Nelson, they decided to be very inclusive in their trials testing for PK. Inclusive to the point of including cockroaches as participants in the test. When Radin’s ideas were challenged later on he stated in the conclusion of his re-analysis of psychokinesis that “the cumulative data are now sufficiently persuasive to advance beyond the timid conclusion of ‘not proven’ and that it is more fruitful to focus on understanding the nature of PK rather than to concentrate solely on the question of existence” (Radin, et al.). Radin also happened to be elected as President of the Parapsycholo