From: Nathan J. Nelson
To: Dr. Tucker, Shin-Ping
Subject: Homework 8
4 April 2019
What would you do?
2. It is 2025 and fully automated self-driving cars are now widely available. In fact, such cars can be bought for only a $5,000 premium over traditional, nonautomated cars. You are in the market for a new car. Which model do you select, the AV or traditional? Why?
First, do we assume that car means any vehicle that is a not a sport utility vehicle or truck? If that is the case, I would not purchase one. If car is used as the generic, I still wouldn’t purchase one as I maneuver around areas that are not widely accessible to internet or internet connectivity which could possibly diminish that effectiveness of the workings of the vehicle. Furthermore, do these vehicles in 2025 have the knowledge how to back my boat into the lake and to maneuver around obstacles that are in the water? Most likely not.
4. You have volunteered to lead a group of local citizens in approaching the board of directors of the nearest hospital which is 55 miles away about establish remote monitoring of 25 or so chronically ill people in your small community of Alaska. How would you convince the board to support your community? What sorts of facts do you need to gather to support your case . What specific services and support would you request?
The very first question that we need to ask, are the 25 chronically ill people willing to share and participate in this program? As this is a remote community, is there sufficient internet access and broadband capabilities to support these services? Third, are there sufficient medical personnel available to monitor these individuals? Furthermore, do the patients themselves have the technological knowledge to operate the devices and communicate with a medical professional at the receiving end? The final question to ask for the purpose of answering the question as there could be more, are there specific regulations regarding the equipment that would require state to authorize its use?
Critical Thinking Watson
1. As noted in the case, the OEA pilot system was tested in 2015 and was able to suggest the same treatment plans as the physicians on 90% of the selected cases. Should Anderson accept this degree of accuracy? How should it determine an acceptable level of accuracy for such a system?
First, we need to ask, what is the degree of accuracy among human doctors, what is the degree of error where this could have occurred by chance, and what are the repercussions of getting a wrong diagnosis? For medical fields, there should be a less than 2 percent margin of error.
2. What key learnings did MD Anderson gain from this effort that may influence future efforts?
They need to ensure that other participating hospitals are working towards the same objectives, if not they are not getting enough data to help dial in the technology. Second, pick a disease and follow it through to the end. Jumping from one illness to the next wastes time and resources.
3. Should Anderson personnel have known that in choosing a new health records system they would need to restart the entire project. If so, what factors may have caused them to make this choice?
Regardless of whether the personnel knew or not, they still should have tested compatibility before switching to a new system. Not testing the system out was carelessness on their part.
Critical Thinking Sophia
1. What advantages does DDM system have compared to the approach attempted by Anderson? Which approach do you believe has the greater potential for success in the long run? Why?
There are more facilities taking part in the technology to include a greater sample of data that they system is able to draw from.
2. The creation of a patient database shared among hospitals globally raises concerns about patient privacy. How might DDM address this concern?
Be 100% transparent about the sharing of the information, how it is shared, who it is shared with. To alleviate some concerns they may be able to say that personally identifiable information is deleted or omitted from the sharing.
3. Do research to determine whether or not the DDM technology improved patient outcomes, lowered costs, or provided some other benefit.
According to www.europeanpharmaceuticalreview.com, the use of Sophia DDM has improved the identification process in cancer patients in Latin America. No other information was found on it lowering healthcare costs, other than those stated in the book, which were when a clinic or hospital sends in a sample, there is a 50-200 fee for the use of the technology as it is Software As A Service, therefore, they aren’t paying yearly licensing fees for machinery and other technology.