<link>

I would. I once had seven blood tests to rule out a bunch of diseases. A few years later I had a new doctor and called the old one to ask for my records. Sorry! We chucked 'em. "Really?" I asked. "Can you do that?" They explained that Virginia law didn't require records to be kept around very long.

That's the last time I trust a doctor to keep my records. Plus my memory sucks, so I like the idea of multiple doctors being able to access reliable records if something comes up.

Then again, I was an early adopter of online banking, so maybe I'm just credulous about privacy assurances.

I would...

Only if it had the full description and imaging results of my genitalia.

Your medical records already are online. That is, if you've been treated at any major academic health center. As a health services researcher at Columbia U, for example, I had access to every patient treated at CU, from my work desktop. Any CU healthcare practitioner had similar access.

As someone who gets denied/priced out of private coverage all the time due to an oddball disease I had when I was a kid, I have to imagine that insurers know everything pertinent about me already from hospitalization records.

So I'm not sure what kind of privacy exists as-is, at least in terms of employment and insurance. In my opinion, putting things online might spur legislators to take medical privacy a little more seriously. I know that sounds counter-intuitive, but I haven't really felt like my records are solely mine at any point in my life.

Saletan, if I find out you have any allergies, guess what I'm going to try and slip into your cereal. :D

If the system they set up is really useful to doctors, then sure I would. I do my banking online, and I that's information I consider more highly sensitive.

I would, but not for my medical treatment purposes. I'd rather doctors just ask me for my history, since I know all of it. Plus, you can and should obtain all of your medical records from previous doctors (This was difficult some years ago, but with the HIPAA changes that went into effect ~ 5 years ago, it has gotten easier). Plus, what if your info gets hacked??? The last thing I would want is for Doctor A to prescribe me some medication that I don't need, or that interacts badly with something else, because of inaccurate info. I'd rather someone come up with this application for research purposes (much like is being proposed for human genome data now), and have all my medical stats there, available to be searched - but without my name attached to them.

Two responses:

1) Sararudh, the records you were looking at were not online. They were accessible via your hospitals intranet. So they were still behind a few layers of security. To have gotten access, you had to understand and agree to compy with HIPAA rules (for what thats worth).

2) Holmstrand, I like that idea. For this system to work, that seems like an essential security precaution. You could have a separate medical identification number that only you know.

If the doctors did likewise I would. The current system leaves the patient( and all too often, cooperating physicians) out of the loop. Privacy too has its drawbacks.

I would, too, absolutely. In this day and age of HMOs and one main doctor and one main gynocologist referring us to scads of other specialists who don't always report back to the main doctor or the main gynocologist (who rarely reports to the main doctor and vice versa), having medical records in one place makes serious sense. Forcing this vast array of professional egos to check historical facts about you instead of assuming them could also save lives - and overall healthcare and prescription costs.

And as to privacy concerns, I, too, bank and shop online, so it's hard to see any issues. What a great thought: having ALL my key info at my fingertips!

It works for the VA.

<link>

Perhaps the solution is anonymization. Patients are assigned a unique random number by the system. No personally identifiable information is stored.

To authorize a doctor to access the records, patient sets their account as visible to doctor. Patient then gives doctor their unique number. Doctor keeps minimal local records to match patient name to number.

Now, whilst patient data is centralized, patient identity is not. Of course, if you lose/forget your number before you give it to the doctor, too bad.

I understand the issue to be a real double, perhaps triple edged sword. I think it is necessary in some diseases that the records are available for case study but the same transparancy needed for research works agains tthe patient with regards to insurance companies denying claims. Lastly is the supposed reason the Hippa law was enacted, to increase personal privacy. Since I do have one of those diseases and I have pretty much told the insurance company sod off I am doing things my way and because I really hope for a cure I would share online forsaking my privacy if it would help.

I've worked for several medical institutions who are in various stages of converting to EMR (electronic medical records) or have converted. As one writer indicated, a worker in a hospital or clinic, depending on access level, can see patient records going back to whenever records were converted to electronic data. Staff restrictions included not being able to look at one's own or family members' records without written permission of the physician or family member--a few staff members were fired before employees took this seriously. This ensured a certain level of privacy.

Medical records have been available for a long time--does anyone remember the Medical Information Bureau, which functions rather like an unregulated private credit service? Other than stupidities like laptops being lost or data tapes in cars that are stolen (both of which have occurred), websites with health information are very secure, just like banking sites, and most of us have been transmitting financial information electronically in one form or another for years.

So, yes, I wouldn't mind having my medical records on line and made available, especially if it were a matter of life and death. If I were allergic to, say, penicillin, and it kept a physician from administering that medication, thus keeping me from having a reaction that could cause death, you're darn right I'd like to have that information available.

I would, sure, for my kids, if nothing else, especially as I was a sperm donor.

I have a heart/vascular problem that they should know of, as well as fungal infections from childhood and who knows if they are related to the vascular condition? So.. yes