Department Of Public Health Temporarily Closes Downtown Chipotle Over Health Violations

Hungry workers in the Loop were confused when they flocked to a popular Chipotle on Tuesday and found the restaurant dark and empty inside. As a sign on the door stated, the license for the Chipotle on Michigan Avenue had been suspended on Monday, September 21.

Update 3:30 p.m.: According to a Chipotle spokesperson, the restaurant passed its re-inspection and will be opening again shortly. The Department of Public Health sign has since been replaced with a “Don’t Panic” sign from Chipotle.

According to the Department of Public Health, the main reason for the license suspension was fruit flies.

“Over 30 flying insects on walls and ceiling,” an official report noted on September 14.

When the Department of Public Health returned on September 21 and found the problem was still present, they closed the restaurant.

“The restaurant was closed after a regular health department inspection identified an operating issue,” wrote a Chipotle spokesperson. “The issue has been addressed and the restaurant will reopen pending re-inspection by the health department, tentatively this afternoon.”

How common is a problem like fruit flies? According to the Department of Public Health, it’s “fairly common.”

A spokesperson with the Department said a problem like this “can usually be resolved quickly with the assistance of professional pest control operators.”

View the original content and more from this author here: http://ift.tt/1Va3wBI

from health IT caucus http://ift.tt/1iw9hgx
via IFTTT

ONC releases final plan for health IT through 2020

The Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT released its final plan Monday for the nation’s development of health IT over the next five years.

The Federal Health IT Strategic Plan 2015-2020 lays out how ONC and other federal agencies plan to use IT to promote health care and wellness in the coming years, particularly thorough the promotion of interoperable electronic health records.

While IT is the focus of the extensive plan, quality health care is the end goal, wrote Karen DeSalvo, national coordinator for health IT, said in an ONC blog post after the plan’s release.

“The Plan’s strategies for achieving this aim focus on making electronic information available so individuals can manage their health, providers can deliver high-quality care to their patients, public health entities and long-term services and supports can improve community health, and scientists and innovators can advance cutting-edge research and solutions,” DeSalvo said in the post, which was cowritten by Gretchen Wyatt, a senior strategy adviser, and Matthew Swain, a senior strategy analyst.

DeSalvo and her colleagues added, “Where the Plan has a broad scope, it’s implementation has a singular focus: improving the health and well-being of this nation through responsive, collective engagement on health IT and information use.”

This latest document will continue to build on a prior plan from 2011, which focused on setting the foundation for the nation’s health IT infrastructure, fostering and encouraging the use of EHRs by hospitals and health care providers.

“This was our opportunity to work with our federal partners and think about a future agenda in which we’re working to improve health well beyond what the health care system can do,” DeSalvo said in December when the draft of the plan was released.

This plan’s scope extends beyond electronic health records, said Seth Sazinski, director of ONC’s Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Analysis.

“One of the key points from a strategic emphasis was about broadening our focus with the plan. So this meant more of a focus on health, including health care, as well as from a technology standpoint looking beyond EHRs to other types of health IT and things like telehealth,” Sazinski said.

Before arriving at the final strategic plan, ONC received feedback from more than 400 people and organizations. The executive summary explains that despite being called the “final” strategic plan, ONC and the federal government will make adjustments if needed, continuing to engage key stakeholders to ensure the nation can take advantage of the developing health IT infrastructure.

View the original content and more from this author here: http://ift.tt/1FtF4cH

from health IT caucus http://ift.tt/1iw9ikK
via IFTTT

A fraction of mobile health apps control download market

New mobile health apps face a challenge in gaining recognition and adoption in the mHealth app market, where a miniscule fraction of the apps have nearly 50% of the market.

There are more than 165,000 consumer mobile health apps, according to research from healthcare technologyservice provider IMS Health, and 36 of those apps account for almost half of app downloads. Greater than 90% of downloads come from a mere 12% of the available mHealth apps. The vastness of the mHealth app market makes it unsurprising that so few applications are established as consumers’ favorites. People may download an app based on suggestions from friends or medical professionals, but they’re unlikely to take the time to thoroughly evaluate which app works best for them — especially when there are more than 100,000 possibilities.

Users are more likely to stick with an mHealth app if it was recommended to them by healthcare professional, at least for a limited time. The IMS report noted that 30-day retention rates for apps were 10% higher among patients that were “prescribed” to download and operate a specific app by a healthcare employee. Under that same directive, the retention rate for fitness apps was 30%.

IMS Health found 34% of mHealth apps can connect to social networks, up from 26% in 2013. While social connectivity improved, not as much progress was made concerning mobile health apps hooking into providers’ electronic healthcare systems, such as EHRs. Murray Aitken, executive director of the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics, addressed what’s preventing app and provider collaboration and said, “Healthcare providers are actively addressing the remaining barriers. These include… creating practical reimbursement models and ensuring true interoperability within and across healthcare systems.”

Mobile health apps could communicate with more healthcare systems and become a larger part of patient care if the recent increase in clinical trials on mHealth apps gives providers conclusive proof that apps are worth their time. There are 300 clinical trials underway using mobile apps, more than twice the 135 trials conducted two years ago.

View the original content and more from this author here: http://ift.tt/1FtF2Br

from health IT caucus http://ift.tt/1iw9ikG
via IFTTT

Apple rejected satirical app explaining politicians’ views on reproductive health

It’s not the opposite of Tinder, exactly, but you might not get to try it anyway.

Created by advocacy group Lady Parts Justice, Hinder is an app designed to help Tindering millennials make sense of where politicians stand on issues like Planned Parenthood, abortion, and LGBT rights. Instead of scoring you a date, swiping lets you learn what about your elected officials think about reproductive rights.

There’s just one problem—Hinder isn’t available in the App Store. When LPJ submitted it to Apple, it was denied, the Huffington Post reports. Apple reportedly cited Rule 14, which states that “Any App that is defamatory, offensive, mean-spirited, or likely to place the targeted individual or group in harm’s way will be rejected.”

The problem is, there’s a caveat to Rule 14: “Professional political satirists and humorists are exempt from the ban on offensive or mean-spirited commentary.” I’d say Winstead, and the long list of professional humorists and writers who support LPJ fall into that category.

Apple didn’t respond to a request for comment at press time.

The comedians and writers behind Lady Parts Justice include The Daily Show co-creator Lizz Winstead, and Arun Chaudhary, the White House’s first official videographer.

The app clearly satirizes wildly popular dating app Tinder while taking comedic elements similar to The Daily Show‘s biting and insightful critique on politics and culture and mashing it into one great app. It takes just seconds to learn where your local leaders stand on different issues, and it also links you to news about them backing up the facts.

A video describing the application explains it as The Daily Show meets Facebook meets Tinder—”new technological innovation that gives YOU access to all the people who want access to YOU.”

In addition, it’s unclear how the app itself is defamatory or likely to place politicians in harm’s way—it cites news sources and doesn’t condone violence of any kind. If anything, it helps to educate people on whether or not the people they vote for believe in similar things.

View the original content and more from this author here: http://ift.tt/1Whk515

from health IT caucus http://ift.tt/1iw9i48
via IFTTT

World Health Organization wants to know how happy we are

Are you satisfied with life? The World Health Organization wants to know, and its first guinea pigs are the people in 53 European countries.

The WHO decided three years ago to try to include measures of well-being in its health assessments. It came up with five key measures. Four are objective, evaluating social connectedness, economic security, people’s natural and built environments, and their education. The fifth – life satisfaction – is subjective.

In its European Health Report 2015, the WHO considers how to standardise measures of well-being across different cultures that might have contrasting views on the value of material success or equality, for instance.

“All we’ve ever reported on has been death, disease and disability,” says Claudia Stein of the WHO. “Health is not just the absence of disease.”

The WHO is not abandoning traditional indicators of health. But by looking at how culture impacts health, it may be possible to make further improvements.

Other researchers applaud the WHO’s objectives, but warn they won’t be easily met. “Measuring subjective well-being in 53 countries is challenging because of cultural variation, but potentially adds a new and different dimension to monitoring,” says Michael Marmot of University College London’s Institute of Health Equity. “We should be wary, though, of lumping ‘health’ and ‘well-being’ together, as their determinants overlap but are not identical.”

The WHO’s move is an important one, says David Napier, professor of medical anthropology at University College London – not only because of the rise in large-scale migrations but also because of a trend to transform medicine from a science of sickness to a science of health.

Napier and his colleagues published a study on culture and health last year (The Lancet, doi.org/f2vz23). “As we pointed out the systematic neglect of culture in health and healthcare is the single biggest barrier to the advancement of the highest standards of health worldwide,” he says.

View the original content and more from this author here: http://ift.tt/1KMNAnx

from health IT caucus http://ift.tt/1FtEVWv
via IFTTT

Republican Health-Policy Focus Shifts to Abortion Limits

WASHINGTON—With little to show for their efforts to repeal the 2010 health law, Republicans have refocused on trying to defund Planned Parenthood Federation of America and tighten federal abortion restrictions.

The shift has occurred both on Capitol Hill and the campaign trail. In the most recent GOP presidential debate, abortion was a prominent talking point while candidates mentioned the Affordable Care Act only a handful of times. In Congress, Republicans are weighing shutting down the government on Oct. 1 in a bid to defund Planned Parenthood. And both chambers are voting on antiabortion bills this month amid a crush of other issues.

The GOP shift reflects a grudging acknowledgment that repealing the ACA won’t happen as long as President Barack Obama is in office. “People are sick and tired of Obamacare,” said Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute, which wants to limit government involvement in health coverage. “Planned Parenthood is something new and fresh.”

Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) and conservative House Republicans led the charge in 2013 to block funding for the health law in a fight that led to a partial government shutdown. Now, Mr. Cruz and his House allies are again trying to use a must-pass spending bill in late September as leverage to try to cut funding for Planned Parenthood. A government shutdown back then didn’t actually block funds for the health law, just as a shutdown now wouldn’t cut off money for the women’s health organization.

Republicans have sought to defund Planned Parenthood since July, when the first of a series of videos released by an antiabortion group showed officials with the group discussing procuring fetal tissue from abortions to provide to third parties for medical research.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) is expected to take the first stepstoward setting up a Thursday vote on a spending bill that would seek to cut federal funds for Planned Parenthood, congressional aides said. Democrats are expected to prevent the measure from getting the 60 votes needed to clear a procedural hurdle. At that point, Mr. McConnell would likely move to consider a spending bill that retains Planned Parenthood funding, aides said.

Before that, on Tuesday, the Senate is scheduled to vote on a bill banning abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

The House, which has voted more than 50 times to repeal or undercut parts of the health law, has also recently shifted its focus to antiabortion measures. Last week, the chamber passed a one-year moratorium on Planned Parenthood funding and another antiabortion bill.

Rep. Roger Williams (R., Texas) said that his constituents have urged him to vote against any spending bill that includes funding for the group. “Between my conscience and my district, I won’t be voting to fund Planned Parenthood,” he said.

But attention to the defunding effort also is exposing tensions within the GOP. While many House Republicans say they would oppose any spending bill that includes funding for Planned Parenthood, other GOP lawmakers say that strategy would spark a public backlash without actually ending the group’s federal funding.

Rep. Tom McClintock (R., Calif.) said the latest Planned Parenthood fight was undermining GOP efforts to reduce federal spending. “I’m afraid the question over Planned Parenthood has distracted public attention from that overriding responsibility that we have to put the nation’s finances back in order before we bankrupt it,” he said in a recent interview.

Republicans’ shift away from the health law has come at the same time they have picked up some Democratic allies in their efforts to chip away at some of the health law’s least popular provisions. Last week Sen. Martin Heinrich (D., N.M.) backed a measure to repeal a 40% excise tax on generous employer plans.

A Senate bill to repeal a 2.3% tax on medical devices also has bipartisan support, particularly from Democrats whose states are home to medical-device companies. The two measures could get rolled into year-end negotiations between the White House and Congress as potential GOP demands in exchange for raising the federal borrowing limit or increasing spending levels.

Republicans’ plans to use reconciliation, a procedural shortcut tied to the budget process, to repeal the health law have faded as GOP leaders have proposed instead using reconciliation to cut funding for Planned Parenthood.

Under reconciliation, a bill can be passed in the Senate with just a simple majority, enabling partisan legislation to reach the president’s desk. Most measures need 60 votes to clear procedural hurdles in the Senate, where Republicans hold 54 seats.

Even if Mr. Obama would veto any bills to eliminate Planned Parenthood funding or add new abortion limits, many Republicans want to force him to make that choice. By contrast, the battle lines around the health care law are already clearly drawn, they said.

“The health-care law is fairly clear in people’s minds: they know Republicans are against it; they know Barack Obama’s for it,” said Rep. Trent Franks (R., Ariz.) But the Planned Parenthood debate is “not as well defined,” he said.

The health law has faded somewhat as a GOP talking point in part because many candidates are still honing their proposals for what would replace it.

Outlining what they would change means distilling down complicated proposals that are difficult for voters to digest. Opposition to the law is likely to heat up once more candidates reveal their proposals, policy experts said.

Momentum has also slowed in the wake of a Supreme Court ruling that upheld subsidized health insurance for lower-income Americans. The June ruling preserved a centerpiece of the law and was a major blow to critics of the ACA.

The court’s decision to uphold subsidies to offset premiums spared Republicans a messy internal debate over how far to go to protect those who would have suddenly lost coverage. Few Republicans have been eager to reopen the discussion over how to replace the health law.

View the original content and more from this author here: http://ift.tt/1OrxCkY

from health IT caucus http://ift.tt/1OrxDFD
via IFTTT

ONC Releases Final Federal Health IT Strategic Plan 2015-2020

Today the ONC has issued the Federal Health IT Strategic Plan 2015-2020 that lays out the vision, goals, and actions that the federal government intends to apply the effective use of health IT  immediately and in the coming years. This outlined plans aims to modernize the nation’s health IT infrastructure to enable individuals, their providers, and communities achieve their health and wellness goals. The ONC states that this robust health IT infrastructure should support the dynamic use of electronic information for:

– individuals to manage their health

– providers that can deliver high-quality care to their patients

– public health entities and long-term services to improve community health

– scientists and innovators that can advance cutting-edge research and solutions

In a blog post announcement, Karen DeSalvo, M.D., national coordinator for health IT and acting assistant secretary for health states:

“With the release of the Plan, we now turn our attention toward achieving the Plan’s goals, while following the principles that guide our core vision. Where the Plan has a broad scope, its implementation has a singular focus: improving the health and well-being of this nation through responsive, collective engagement on health IT and information use.

We will continue to work with stakeholders to evaluate progress as the health IT infrastructure advances and new health, information, and technology needs arise. This engagement will help us prioritize health IT efforts and identify strategic gaps, and will help stakeholders better understand the federal intent of various policies and actions. Together, we will use the Plan’s principles to help direct us to our final shared destination of high-quality care, lower costs, healthy population and engaged people.”

Plan’s Framework

The Federal Health IT Strategic Plan 2015-2020 includes four overarching goals:

Goal 1: Advance Person-Centered and Self-Managed Health

• Objective A: Empower individual, family, and caregiver health management and engagement

• Objective B: Foster individual, provider, and community partnerships

Goal 2: Transform Health Care Delivery and Community Health

• Objective A: Improve health care quality, access, and experience through safe, timely, effective, efficient, equitable, and person-centered care

• Objective B: Support the delivery of high-value health care

• Objective C: Protect and promote public health and healthy, resilient communities

Goal 3: Foster Research, Scientific Knowledge, and Innovation

• Objective A: Increase access to and usability of high-quality electronic health information and services

• Objective B: Accelerate the development and commercialization of innovative technologies and solutions

• Objective C: Invest, disseminate, and translate research on how health IT can improve health and care delivery

Goal 4: Enhance Nation’s Health IT Infrastructure

• Objective A: Finalize and implement the Nationwide Interoperability Roadmap

• Objective B: Protect the privacy and security of health information

• Objective C: Identify, prioritize, and advance technical standards to support secure and interoperable health information and health IT

• Objective D: Increase user and market confidence in the safety and safe use of health IT products, systems, and services

• Objective E: Advance a national communications infrastructure that supports health, safety, and care delivery

View the original content and more from this author here: http://ift.tt/1FbJXav

from health IT caucus http://ift.tt/1KsdoDX
via IFTTT