- Medical Informatics
- Internal Medicine
Clinical Associate Professor, Medicine - General Medical Disciplines
D&E Ground Medical Ward Director, Stanford University Medical Center (2002 - 2006)
Medical Director for Clinical Informatics, Stanford University Medical Center (2006 - 2007)
Associate Chief Medical Information Officer, Stanford University Medical Center (2007 - 2013)
Chair, Medical Staff HIM Committee, Stanford University Medical Center (2009 - Present)
Chief Medical Information Officer, Stanford University Medical Center (2013 - Present)
Honors & Awards
Award for Professionalism in a Member of the Medicine Housestaff, Stanford University Medical Center (2001)
Charles Dorsey Armstrong Award for Excellence in Patient Care, Stanford University Medical Center (2001)
Regional ACP-ASIM Clinical Vignette Poster Competition, 2nd Prize, American College of Physicians (2001)
Stanford Internal Medicine Divisional Teaching Award, Stanford University Medical Center (2003)
David A. Rytand Clinical Teaching Award, Stanford University Department of Medicine (2005)
Medical Education:Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine (1998) NH
Board Certification: Clinical Informatics, American Board of Preventive Medicine (2014)
Residency:Stanford University School of Medicine (2001) CA
Internship:Stanford University School of Medicine (1999) CA
Board Certification: Internal Medicine, American Board of Internal Medicine (2001)
MD, Dartmouth Medical School, Medicine (1998)
BA, Northwestern University, Bachelor of Arts in Music (1990)
Community and International Work
Arbor Free Clinic, Menlo Park, CA
Education and Care to Underserved Patients
Stanford University Medical School
East Palo Alto
Opportunities for Student Involvement
Current Research and Scholarly Interests
Teaching Physical Examination
Electronic Release of Pathology and Radiology Results to Patients: Opinions and Experiences of Oncologists.
Journal of oncology practice / American Society of Clinical Oncology
2016; 12 (8): e792-9
There is an emerging standard to provide patients rapid electronic access to elements of their medical records. Although surveys of patients generally support it, this practice is controversial among oncologists, because few empiric data are available for scenarios of potentially life-threatening conditions like cancer. We report the views of oncologists about patient electronic access to radiology and pathology results that could potentially indicate disease progression.Four months before oncologists were surveyed, final results of radiology/pathology reports were routinely made available to patients online through a secure portal after a 7-day, hold to provide clinicians time to review and communicate results with the patients. Mixed methods were used to assess physician attitudes and experiences toward this change.One hundred twenty-nine oncologists were surveyed, and 82 (64%) responded. A small majority (54%) responded that the release of reports was somewhat or very beneficial for patients who received normal radiology/pathology results before discussion with a physician, but 87% said it was somewhat or very harmful for patients to receive abnormal results before discussion. Forty-nine percent reported that release of reports had a somewhat or very negative impact on communication with their patients.Almost half of oncologists reported that sharing digital radiology and pathology records had a negative impact on their communication with patients. Patient surveys in similar cancer populations would complement the physician perspective. Efforts are needed to improve consensus among oncologists and patients on how to best communicate such results in a timely fashion.
View details for DOI 10.1200/JOP.2016.011098
View details for PubMedID 27382001
Health information exchange policies of 11 diverse health systems and the associated impact on volume of exchange.
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
Provider organizations increasingly have the ability to exchange patient health information electronically. Organizational health information exchange (HIE) policy decisions can impact the extent to which external information is readily available to providers, but this relationship has not been well studied.Our objective was to examine the relationship between electronic exchange of patient health information across organizations and organizational HIE policy decisions. We focused on 2 key decisions: whether to automatically search for information from other organizations and whether to require HIE-specific patient consent.We conducted a retrospective time series analysis of the effect of automatic querying and the patient consent requirement on the monthly volume of clinical summaries exchanged. We could not assess degree of use or usefulness of summaries, organizational decision-making processes, or generalizability to other vendors.Between 2013 and 2015, clinical summary exchange volume increased by 1349% across 11 organizations. Nine of the 11 systems were set up to enable auto-querying, and auto-querying was associated with a significant increase in the monthly rate of exchange (P = .006 for change in trend). Seven of the 11 organizations did not require patient consent specifically for HIE, and these organizations experienced a greater increase in volume of exchange over time compared to organizations that required consent.Automatic querying and limited consent requirements are organizational HIE policy decisions that impact the volume of exchange, and ultimately the information available to providers to support optimal care. Future efforts to ensure effective HIE may need to explicitly address these factors.
View details for DOI 10.1093/jamia/ocw063
View details for PubMedID 27301748
- A User-Centered Design Approach to Information Sharing for Older Patients and Their Families. JAMA internal medicine 2015; 175 (9): 1498-1499
An Exponential Increase in Regional Health Information Exchange With Collaborative Policies and Technologies.
Studies in health technology and informatics
2015; 216: 931-?
In the United States, the ability to securely exchange health information between organization has been limited by technical interoperability, patient identity matching, and variable institutional policies. Here, we examine the regional experience in a national health information exchange network by examining clinical data sharing between eleven Northern California organizations using the same health information exchange (HIE) platform between 2013-2014. We identify key policies and technologies that have led to a dramatic increase in health information exchange.
View details for PubMedID 26262233
The electronic health record as a healthcare management strategy and implications for obstetrics and gynecologic practice
CURRENT OPINION IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
2013; 25 (6): 476-481
To review the current trends, utilities, impacts and strategy for electronic health records (EHRs) as related to obstetrics and gynecology.Adoption and utilization of EHRs are increasing rapidly but variably, given pressures of financial incentives, policy and technological advancement. Adoption is outpacing published evidence, but there is a growing body of descriptive literature regarding incentives, benefits, risks and costs of adoption and utilization. Further, there is a rising body of evidence that EHRs can bring benefits to processes and outcomes, and that their implementation can be considered as a healthcare management strategy. Obstetrics and gynecology practices have specific needs, which must be addressed in the adoption of such technology. Specialty specific literature is sparse but should be considered as part of any strategy aimed at achieving quality improvement and practice behavior change.Obstetrics and gynecologic practice presents unique challenges to the effective adoption and use of EHR technologies, but there is promise as the technologies, integration and usability are rapidly improving. This technology will have an increasing impact on the practice of obstetrics and gynecology in the coming years.
View details for DOI 10.1097/GCO.0000000000000029
View details for Web of Science ID 000326943500009
View details for PubMedID 24185005