Panel weighs proposal to digitize federal employee health records
Effort would be funded through an OPM account and eventual savings from technology; premiums would not rise.
Members of Congress debated a bill Wednesday that would convert federal employee health records to electronic files that employees would keep for life and that would transfer among doctors.
Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., chairman of the House Government Reform Subcommittee on the Federal Workforce and Agency Organization, held a hearing on the bill he introduced (H.R. 4859) last week that would mandate portable electronic health records within five years for everyone covered by federal employee health insurance.
"We have a wonderful opportunity to improve the quality and delivery of health care for the over 8 million participants in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and at the same time serve as a model to affect change elsewhere," Porter said.
He and his co-sponsor, Rep. William Lacy Clay, D-Mo., said making health records electronic would save money and prevent medical errors. The congressmen invited former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., who now runs the Center for Health Transformation, to make the case.
"I start with a very simple premise: Paper kills," Gingrich testified, citing statistics that 98,000 Americans die as a result of medical errors each year. He offered several anecdotes, including one about the Central Utah Multi-Specialty Clinic, which built electronic health records and will save an estimated $14 million over five years as a result of efficiency and automation.
Porter cited a RAND Corp. study estimating that $162 billion could be saved annually if the country launches widespread health-care automation.
The bill would require carriers who participate in the federal plan to provide electronic health records and also would allow individuals to add information including family history, diet and over-the-counter medications.
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-D.C., said she supports the notion of electronic health records but questioned funding and said participation should be voluntary.
"I think that the federal workforce is an appropriate guinea pig to experiment on--that is to say if, in fact, you have willing guinea pigs," Norton said. "If you're going to put people's medical records out there in the great cyberspace beyond …do not even consider an 'everybody's in it and you've got to opt out' [system]."
Gingrich agreed, and predicted that federal employees would seek out electronic health records on their own.
"Make it available; do not make it mandatory," Gingrich said. "But I think because the federal employee workforce is actually a pretty smart workforce ... I think you'll see a very rapid migration in this direction."
Funding for the project remains foggier. The Porter-Clay bill would fund the technology by tapping into an account that the Office of Personnel Management keeps for the administrative costs of running the FEHB program, and by counting on eventual savings from the technology. It would not raise premiums.
Charles Fallis, president of the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association, said in a statement that his chief concern is cost.
"Tapping into these contributions in order to satisfy additional program spending represents a clear departure from past practice in the administration of the FEHBP program," Fallis said, and may "set a precedent that could lead to future abuse."
Porter, whose subcommittee also heard from a number of medical and industry experts, said he would hold another hearing on the bill.