Ambivalence in the Time of Measles

There’s a Spanish novel that has the most intriguing title, Love in the Time of Cholera. What a linguistic contrast: love and cholera.  Our current reality, involving measles outbreaks in Washington and Vancouver, might be described as “ambivalence in the time of measles.”

Anyone who has interest in such topics, typically parents of young children, healthcare professionals, or people who follow health trends, is well aware of the trend toward deferring or refusing vaccination for children.  A common counter to this trend is to provide vaccine education.

The results of vaccine education provide ambivalent results: better understanding but future vaccinations less likely. A 2014 study reported in Scientific American demonstrated this strikingly:

At the study’s start, the group of parents who were most opposed to vaccination said that on average, the chance they would vaccinate a future child against MMR was 70 percent.

After these parents had been given information that the MMR vaccine does not cause autism, they said, on average, the chance they would vaccinate a future child was only 45 percent — even though they also said they were now less likely to believe the vaccine could cause autism.

Such a view is madness to the scientific community who labor diligently to develop and test vaccines, and to advise on vaccination schedules.

But humans are, at heart, most illogical creatures.  We do not often understand why we make the decisions that we do.  Our emotions rule our reason, and even when we know something to be true we can feel another way about it.

While public health experts examine ways to improve adherence and communication, it makes sense to step back and think a bit more about the greater trend that has united folks across the ideological spectrum.

Most curiously, the trend against vaccinations is one of the few areas where ideological conservatives and ideological liberals can agree.  And since we’re already examining an impassioned, heated topic, we might as well bring politics into it too.

What could possibly bring conservatives and liberals into a hugging kumbaya on a common topic?  Other than Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump in 2016, that is. Leftists and rightists agreed that they wanted a populist candidate that abjured mainstream, conventional wisdom.

That same sensibility, rejection of conventional wisdom and the establishment, guides the concerns of parents who oppose vaccination.

Putting aside the now-debunked link between the increase in autism rates and vaccinations, there is plenty of material for vague emotional concerns related to scientific and bureaucratic processes that guide new healthcare procedures, drugs, and treatments.

At the heart of all modern challenges to scientific evidence is the misgiving that the scientists and institutions are unduly influenced by greed or other selfish motivations.

The highly contentious history of Roche and oseltamivir (Tamiflu) is one prominent example.  Concerned about pandemic flu in light of the avian influenza scare and the emergent swine flu outbreak, the governments of the US and UK stockpiled hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of Tamiflu for clinics and hospitals.  

The only problem?  It isn’t entirely clear that Tamiflu is more effective than Tylenol.

This dovetails with the current crisis of replicating scientific results. The BBC recently reported, “According to a survey published in the journal Nature last summer, more than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist’s experiments.”

There can be all sorts of speculation about what’s behind the lack of replicability.  But the chief emotional takeaway is that scientific results are not as certain as we would like them to be.

The general public may not be familiar with Roche’s methods in testing Tamiflu, or the study replication problem.  What they are familiar with, though, are outsized promises of scientific knowledge followed by adjustments, caveats, exceptions, and reversals.

Take, for example, changes in basic dietary guidelines. The humble, ubiquitous egg was once considered a poor choice. More recently, however, that has changed:

Eggs, which the government had warned against for 40 years, are now considered part of a healthy diet. ‘Eggs can be part of a healthy eating pattern and people should be thoughtful about including them into a healthy routine,’ said Karen DeSalvo, HHS assistant secretary for health. Evidence has shown that high levels of cholesterol in the blood are associated with saturated fat from fatty meats rather than eggs, leading to a shift in the government’s guidelines.”

Ambivalence is understandable in light of these events. Unfortunately, it creates a crisis of credibility that makes us more vulnerable and more susceptible to mistrust.

We need to grapple with the profit motive and weigh how to balance the American the role of corporations against social good and social confidence.  The notion of bureaucratic policy driving outsize corporate profits is offensive to many. It is an emotional reaction to being walloped in the wallet by the ever-increasing costs of healthcare.   We should all feel a healthy skepticism.The heart of the question, then, is how to better establish credibility regarding the role of profit in scientific (and governmental) guidelines for vaccines.

First, the profit motive in government transactions needs to be made plain. For each policy recommendation, the public should know how much profit is made, and by whom.

Second, introducing simple transparency into the approval process would enable the public to see the evidence that the vaccine is safe and effective. (This would follow the lead of the irreproducible study data being made plain in 2015.)  Note that if the small scale of the harrowing autism study had been spotlighted right away, it would have not passed this test and so much angst would have been prevented.

Where mistakes have been made, can information regarding recommendations be presented as simple-to-follow success scores.  Instead of simply changing guidelines, agencies should publish a clearer statement saying “we were wrong and here’s why.” Connect the mistakes to whoever might have profited by them.  The stories of government fraud, waste, and abuse are legendary, and owning up to that truth would go a long way toward reviving credibility.

Pittsburgh Technology Council Honors Health Monitoring Again; Company is Finalist for Innovator of the Year in the Health IT Category

For the third time in four years, Health Monitoring has been selected by Pittsburgh Technology Council as a finalist in the Tech 50 Awards. This year, Health Monitoring was again honored in the category of Health IT Innovator of the Year.

Since 1996, the PTC’s Tech 50 Awards have recognized the most successful and innovative technology companies in southwestern Pennsylvania. The awards put a spotlight on the region’s transformative technology centers of excellence, including tech companies at all stages of growth. The council also names the region’s top tech executive for the year.

“We are proud to be nominated in the category of Innovator of The Year,” says Kevin Hutchison, CEO of Health Monitoring. “Our company currently provides health monitoring coverage to 12.5% of the American population, and we are continuing to expand our services to help public health departments collect and track vital community health information.”

Health Monitoring is the country’s largest provider of population health monitoring systems, collecting, processing, and analyzing information from 3,600 ambulatory care facilities, nearly 600 hospitals, and the National Poison Data System. Its current projects focus on new applications of real-time data that enable users to track the prevalence of opioid addiction and related conditions.

The Tech 50 award winners will be announced on October 25, 2018 at the Wyndham Grand Pittsburgh.

For more information on Tech 50 and all of the finalists, visit PTC’s page for the event.
For more information on the Pittsburgh Technology Council, visit www.pghtech.org.

Mendocino County Adopts EpiCenter for Community Health Surveillance

Pittsburgh, PA [June 15, 2018] — Health Monitoring and Mendocino County, California, recently finalized a two-year service agreement that will connect the county’s three hospitals to the EpiCenter™ syndromic surveillance system. These hospitals are Mendocino Coast District Hospital, Adventist Health Howard Memorial Hospital, and Adventist Health Ukiah Valley, which together handled more than 50,000 patient visits in 2015.*

With this agreement, Mendocino became the seventh California county to engage the EpiCenter system, joining Alameda, Fresno, Humboldt, Kern, Tulare and Ventura counties.

EpiCenter collects, stores, and analyzes de-identified registration data from hospitals and other healthcare facilities in near–real time. It provides public health with an up-to-the-minute view of population health conditions so that agency personnel have the information they need to address emergent situations promptly.  In Mendocino County, EpiCenter will gather data related to emergency department registrations and patient discharge dispositions.

“We are delighted to partner with the Mendocino County public health department.  This new relationship is particularly exciting, as it expands on the close relationships we have had with local health departments throughout California,” said Kevin Hutchison, Health Monitoring’s president and CEO.

About Health Monitoring

Health Monitoring  is a privately held company specializing in healthcare data analysis.  The company processes and analyzes health‐related data in real time via a Software‐as‐a‐Service (SaaS) approach.  The company’s software products enable clients to increase their understanding of regional health conditions, improve quality and efficiency, and ensure regulatory compliance.

*2015 is the most recent year for which data is available.

Health Monitoring Systems Again Honored by Pittsburgh Technology Council as Tech 50 Awards Finalist

Health Monitoring Systems, the country’s largest provider of population health surveillance data, has again been chosen as an “Innovator of the Year” finalist in the Pittsburgh Technology Council’s annual Tech 50 Awards.

The awards recognize technology centers of excellence, including companies at all stages of growth. Health Monitoring has been selected as a Tech50 finalist twice in the past three years.

Meanwhile, as Pittsburgh creates thousands of new jobs in engineering and systems design, its reputation as an up-and-coming tech hub continues to grow. That makes the honor of being recognized by the PTC even more significant.

“Each year, the Council canvasses the region for the most distinguished public and private technology-oriented companies, and the Tech 50 awards honor those companies that demonstrated the strongest growth and advancement in product or sales success, financial strength, corporate citizenship, job growth and retention and innovative product or technology,” said Audrey Russo, President and CEO  Pittsburgh Technology Council.

“Our company provides health monitoring coverage to 12.5% of American population, and we have the ability to collect 300,000 data messages per hour from hospitals across the nation,” said Kevin Hutchison, CEO of Health Monitoring Systems. “As we continue to grow, helping public health departments to monitor, collect, and maintain vital information, we are excited to be a part of Pittsburgh’s vibrant tech community.”

For more information on Tech 50 and all of the finalists, visit http://bit.ly/pghtech50.

Health Monitoring Systems Named Pittsburgh Tech 50 Awards Finalist by Pittsburgh Technology Council

[Pittsburgh, PA, August 11, 2015] – Pittsburgh’s Health Monitoring Systems, the country’s largest provider of population health surveillance data, has been chosen as an “Innovator of the Year” finalist in the Pittsburgh Technology Council’s Tech 50 Awards.

For nearly 20 years, the Pittsburgh Technology Council’s annual Tech 50 Awards have recognized southwestern Pennsylvania’s most successful, innovative, and thought-leading technology companies, which have become the backbone of Pittsburgh’s new economy.

The awards represent transformative technology centers of excellence with tech companies at all stages of growth. Tech 50 also recognizes the region’s top tech executive.

“Each year, the Council canvasses the region for the most distinguished public and private technology-oriented companies, and the Tech 50 awards honor those companies that demonstrated the strongest growth and advancement in product or sales success, financial strength, corporate citizenship, job growth and retention and innovative product or technology,” said Audrey Russo, President and CEO, Pittsburgh Technology Council. “We are excited to announce the category winners at the awards gala this fall. It is truly a night to celebrate our region’s technology companies and the contributions they have made to our economic vitality.”

“We are especially proud to be nominated in the category of “innovator of the year,” according to Kevin Hutchison, Health Monitoring Systems’ CEO. “Our company provides health monitoring coverage to 12.5% of American population—and we have the ability to collect 300,000 data messages each hour from hospitals across the nation. As we continue to grow and help public health departments to monitor, collect, and maintain vital information, we are excited to be a part of Pittsburgh’s vibrant tech community.”

Tech 50 winners will be announced on October 29, 2015 at the Wyndham Grand Pittsburgh.

To learn more about Health Monitoring Systems, please visit hmsinc.com.

For more information on Tech 50 and all of the finalists, visit http://bit.ly/pghtech50

For more information on the Pittsburgh Technology Council, visit www.pghtech.org. Get regular Twitter updates on Tech 50 by following @pghtech and #pghtech50

Pittsburgh’s Health Monitoring Systems to Provide Public Health Outbreak Surveillance at Super Bowl

With cruise ship norovirus making headlines, it’s easy to realize that an influx of people into a large venue can cause a potential health emergency. Tens of thousands of spectators will pack New Jersey’s MetLife Stadium for the Super Bowl this weekend—during one of the most frigid periods in the region’s history—and Health Monitoring Systems is providing sophisticated outbreak monitoring software that allows the State of New Jersey to quickly identify and react to any public health crisis that could arise. Read more

HMS Featured in Pittsburgh Tribune Review

“Last week, Health Monitoring Systems added the Pennsylvania Department of Health to its growing list of a dozen state-agency customers and about 550 hospitals nationwide using its health surveillance and monitoring service. The home-state deal adds to the company’s claim as the nation’s largest provider of community-health surveillance.” Read the full article in the Pittsburgh Tribune Review Online.

Pittsburgh’s Health Monitoring Systems Helping New Jersey Department of Health Monitor Effects of Superstorm Nemo

(Pittsburgh, PA)—While Superstorm Nemo is only expected to produce an inch of snow in Pittsburgh, areas to our north and east are bracing for the worst. North Side based Health Monitoring Systems is helping public health officials in New Jersey, which is preparing for 12-18 inches of snow, to proactively monitor this potential public health emergency.

Read more

Modular Certification Helps Hospitals Achieve MU Compliance

HMS is currently working toward receiving Modular Certification (Public Health Surveillance) for its Mergence platform.  The key to this certification is the utilization of HMS’ Mergence data integration engine. Mergence is a service provided to a medical facility—and has been fine-tuned by HMS to meet client needs.

 

This will assist hospitals in achieving Meaningful Use Compliance—without requiring facilities to change their current EpiCenter data feeds. Data from Mergence is sent in certified, secure format to HMS’ EpiCenter system.

Read more

Lessons Learned from Superstorm Sandy

It’s not often that storms as large as Sandy impact our county—and the effects that it had on public health are still being calculated.

 

HMS reviewed data related to the storm and observed the following data trends in New Jersey:

 

Total emergency room registrations were notably reduced statewide on October 29th, the day that the storm made landfall.  The following day, registrations either returned to normal levels or showed an overall increase.

 

In the week following the storm, emergency room registrations among those 65 and older increased as a percentage of total registrations—from a typical level of 20% to nearly 25%. Conversely, registrations among those ages 12-18 were down proportionately.

Read more