Widgets Magazine
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 58

Thread: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    I will agree that you can make a list of rankings read however you want it to read. Just like you can with anything else, but don't you think that once maybe once Okc or Okla would make it at the top of one of the rankings or lists??

    The main report took in these factors:
    Access - access to health insurance
    Quality - quality of care give by the medical profession
    Equity - equal care based on ethnicity or income level
    Hospital Costs - the expense of hospital care
    Healthy Living - measures how states support their residents healthy lives

    Here is our State's rankings:
    Access - 50th
    Quality - 43rd
    Equity - 50th
    Hosptial Costs - 50th
    Healthy Living - 47th

  2. #2

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    Sooner Dave..........with all things being equal, don't you think that at least once Okc would make it out of the bottom of all of these lists and rankings??

    You can throw out the fast food list or the walking cities list, but you can not throw out all of the rankings and lists as pure biased agenda.

    Okla #2 in strokes
    Okla not one of the top hospitals in the U.S.
    Okla top diabetes state
    Okla fattest cities
    Okla shortest life expectancy.

    Why is everyone picking on Oklahoma??

  3. #3

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    At least USNews spelled out a rather detailed description of the methodology they used that allows the findings of their list to be discussed. That's a hopeful sign....but at the core of that discussoin, note that at the core of their survey was this:

    The doctors were mailed a survey form and asked to list the five hospitals they feel are best in their specialty for difficult cases, without consideration of cost or location.
    Oh, blast. You've just blown objectivity to you-know-where. We're no longer scientific, we're going on people's opinion. Doctors, yes, specialists, apparently, but still its' a "popularity" contest for about 1/3 of the survey's criteria. Was the "most popular" girl in high school really the "best" or "nicest" girl?

    Look, too, at the fundamental selection criteria of a "best hospitals" list:

    In individual specialties, hospitals had to admit and treat a minimum number of patients in 2002, 2003, and 2004 with sufficiently complex conditions in 2002, 2003, and 2004
    This survey opts to find and celebrate hospitals that treat specialty situations particularly well - even rare ones, and that inherently puts smaller states at a disadvantage. If the occurrence rate of a particular rare cancer is reasonably distributed across the country, more populous states will have a higher incidence rate, thus hospitals in those areas will have a greater chance of being listed. There might be one, two, or ?? hospitals in Oklahoma that treated some of these "rare" conditions masterfully, but if they didn't treat what USNews decided was "enough" of them, you might as well be a guy with a knife and a bottle of disinfectant loitering outside McDonalds (after having your 12th fast-food burger and fries )

    Fortunately, the lead paragraph of the story explains (in effect) that you're likely to find good, general care at your local hospital. It's a shame the list isn't entitled to reflect that sentiment, because as it is, the list is misleading, because the absence of any one hospital could merely be because it doesn't see enough of the candidate cases to qualify for rating.

    This kind of list - and qualitative assessments about the "quality" of health care in Oklahoma - none of them take into account other factors, such as:

    * We have one of the leading neuromuscular disease physicians groups in the country - right here in OKC
    * I personally (and I recognize that personal observations do not a trend make) have had the services of a surgeon that has a sterling list of very high-profile patients (many of whom fly in to see him), and he chooses to maintain his surgical practice here in Oklahoma and use Oklahoma hospitals for some reason.
    * The Dean McGee Eye Institute is a nationally recognized leader in vision research
    * Oklahoma was among the first states in the country to experiment with lithotripsy in the destruction of kidney stones (Deaconness Hospital, if memory serves)

    The point isn't about what few things I happen to know - it's that there are two sides to every survey. We can't allow ourselves to see two or three surveys and conclude "Oklahoma health care sucks, we're all fat, and we're all gonna die." It just isn't that simple.

    Again, I'm not trashing the survey or celebrating it, I'm trying to call attention to those facts that should compel us to study the detalis of the survey to determine what is really being reported, not just what the author wants to tell us he or she is reporting, that's all. I'm a firm advocate of everyone using that paperweight between the ears - even me

    -soonerdave

  4. #4

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    So it is just coincidence that all of these studies, lists, and rankings, are flawed against Oklahoma?

    The details that determine the aformentioned are not set up to make Oklahoma at the top of one of these studies.


    Also the US news lists of top 200 hospitals of 2006, there are many hospitals that are on that list from states that compare in size to Okla.

  5. Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    In 11 of the 16 specialties, hard data largely determine a hospital's position. (In the others five, as explained below, the rankings are based only on hospitals' reputation among specialist physicians.) Initial eligibility for these data-driven specialties requires a hospitals to meet any of three standards: membership in the Council of Teaching Hospitals, affiliation with a medical school, or—to open the door to non-teaching hospitals—availability of at least nine out of 18 key technologies like shaped beam radiation, an advanced cancer therapy. This year, fewer than a third of the hospitals qualified.
    We didn't make the top 1/3...whoopee. Certainly not the worst hospitals.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    I do know that University of Oklahoma will be building a world class Diabetes Center along with the Cancer Center at the Okc OU campus.

    I would think that the fact that our state has neither a cancer center nor a diabetes center right now puts us at the bottom in health related studies.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    Quote Originally Posted by okclee View Post
    I would think that the fact that our state has neither a cancer center nor a diabetes center right now puts us at the bottom in health related studies.
    This is the problem, the studies you cited didn't look at this knd of criteria. They focused on things like time spent commuting, how many days people went to the gym, is the scenery pleasant, and how many Sonics there are. Another problem I have is that none of these tell you how the criteria are weighted or even if having more of something is considered bad or good. In fact, we never get to see the raw data to verify anything. And I am quite sure there is no peer review (although that has problems also). Crap, I should start my own think tank and start publishing my own reports.

  8. Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    The Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation is one of the top 12 private medical research institutions in the country, so there's a ranking that doesn't reflect so poorly on the medical field here.

    okclee, you keep lumping in the health-related rankings with HEALTH CARE. We do deserve to be at the bottom of these lists when it comes to healthy lifestyle, but two surveys published by east coast magazines does not convince me that we have THE worst quality of care from physicians or THE worst equity among all income and social levels.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    jbrown....... I hear what you are saying, but don't you think that the healthy lifestyle is somehow connected to the health care in Okla. and vice versa??

    If we had a healthier lifestyle in Okla then our doctors would look better, and if our healthcare system was better in Okla then we could lead a healthier lifestyle.


    Does anyone remember just a few years ago that many of Okla top doctors were leaving the state because of the Okla legislature and tort reform?

  10. Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    Healthy lifestyle when it comes to how we eat and how we exercise is cultural. The knowledge and skill of local doctors to treat your cancer or your diabetes has nothing to do with that. Our medical education system is far from the worst in the country and has actually improved immensely under the watch of David Boren.

    I think tort reform is just one tiny issue in all of this. Its something to work on most definitely, but the incident you're talking about was (not surprisingly) blown way out of proportion by the sensationalists at KOCO and KFOR and probably even KWTV.

  11. #11

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    Soonerdave - I salute you

    Just for fun, here are the people who authored the reports cited by OKCLEE:

    Best and Worst Cities for Men 2007 - Jeff O'Connell, Men's Health

    Merograde: Ranking America's City - Jeff O'Connell, Men's Health

    The Fast-food Capital of America - Fortune doesn't site any reports, just anecdotal evidence.

    The Fattest and Fittest Cities - Jeff O'Connell, Men's Health

    The Best Walking Cities - Jeff O'Connell, Editor of Prevention Magazine

    This Jeff O'Connel guy seems to be very busy. Guess what Jeff's other occupation is. He sells excercise books and videos. I guess if you tell the same story over and over people will start to believe it. Not exactly an impartial researcher.

  12. #12

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    Jeff O'Connell is the chief editor of Men's Health Magazine and not the author.

    Three of those sources are from Mens Health Magazine, which is considered to be reputable magazine and not just some random blog.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    He is the author of these reports also. I guess "reputable" is in the eye of reader. One person does a so-called study and present his findings in 5 different places, then use those 5 references to help sell his excerise merchandise. What part is reputable? Did you notice that personal income is used in all of his calculations of health?

  14. #14

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    I guess if it is negative toward Okla or Okc the something is wrong with the study or the report.

    This message board is filled with links to websites touting Okla or Okc at the top of many lists in the U.S. and nobody ever questions the criteria or the source.

    It is all about if the news is good then hooray for Okla, but if the news is bad then the study is biased or there is an agenda or the facts are incomplete.

    Don't shoot the messenger.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    I'm not try to shoot the messenger, but I can see why it looks that way. Just for the record, I am also skeptical on the good new also. A few years ago Tulsa was ranked as one of the top 10 best place to live. However, a little investigative research revealed that Tulsa paid $20,000 to get on the list. Several years ago I believed all of the surveys also, but now I question everything. Usually it is people trying to influence personal political agendas or selling something. There are still people doing real research but they are getting few and far between.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    okclee,

    No offense, but you're missing the point of my (and others) criticism.

    The point is that these are strawman arguments made by someone with a vested interest in the results turning out a certain way. A report by a health editor is just as non-neutral as, say, a report on how healthy hamburgers are by someone from Wendy's\. The point is that these aren't meaningful pieces of evidence to demonstrate the points they intend to demonstrate, and that's often because the base criteria you might [I]expect/I] to be used doesn't make the point as well as you'd like.

    The use of "relative" rates of something (whatever it may be) versus "absolute" rates is a classic misuse of statistics. The "fattest city" report is an inflammatory title that cites just about everything except average weight statistics to support its claim - gym memberships, driving time, etc. A "fattest city" list should be just that - a list of the cities with the highest average per-capita weights for its citizens. Because the distribution of overweight people might not be as pronounced in that vein, the author added other criteria that have nothing to do with how "fat" someone is to embellish their point.

    If studies and surveys have a valid point to make, they shouldn't have to rely on secondary data to prove their "point." It isn't about ignoring Oklahoma problems, it's about the reaction to incendiiary polls, studies, and surveys merely on their face rather than studying the techniques and motivations behind them - no matter how laudable they seem.

    A classic adjunct to this statistics abuse issue is the way cholesterol lowering medications are sold to the public, with almost no reporting of the change in absolute risk for coronary disease for taking statin drugs. The change in absolute risk is astonishingly small, but milllions of people dutifully take their statins under the false impression that they drastically reduce their risk factor for taking them - while drug companies make billions as a result. It's a sad commentary that none of our so-called "news" organizations have investigated what I think is a monumental fraud being perpetrated on the medical consumer, but that's a different issue.

    I guess, to a degree, I'm repeating myself, and I'm sorry for that. I have no problem with simple, sound surveys and research that wants an objective conclusion, whether it is positive or negative for me or you or Oklahoma City. When you say "don't shoot the messenger," you're taking precisely the path those authors want you to take - accept the results they present at face value and be "shocked" into doing what they think is right. You're too smart for that, lee.The data behind those studies that paint such a horrible picture of Oklahoma are not scientific studies; they're compilations of data based largely on what one or two people "think" is right or the way things "oughta" be. And in worse cases, they bear no resemblance to the "facts" they are trying to sell. That's intellectual dishonesty at its worst - no matter how altruistic the motivations.

    Should most Oklahomans eat better and exercise more? Almost certainly. To make that point, wouldn't it be simpler just to perform a survey on national exercise averages rather than construct this strawman stuff about gyms and commuting times? I think so. If we're the "fattest" city, shouldn't that just mean we, on average, weigh more than residents of other states? Probably, but I don't think that's the core data in the "fattest city" survey.

    The problem is that doing pure, "clean" surveys and studies draws a much more boring, and more general conclusion that EVERYONE should be eating better and exercising more. ut doesn't afford these dramatic, headline grabbing opportunities to humiliate one or two cities or states as some low-class, high "offenders" of some purer faith. The "health crowd" has more than a sliver of self-righteousness about itself these days, and the liberties it takes in studies like these to be condescending to those who don't live as "they" think they should is more than a little tiring.

    -soonerdave

  17. #17

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    It's a darn conspiracy to make the red states look bad right?

  18. #18

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    Quote Originally Posted by blabare View Post
    It's a darn conspiracy to make the red states look bad right?
    If this comment is directed at the Commonwealth study then your answer is yes, the choosing of colors to represent good and bad was intended to make Republican leaning states look bad. You can't take the politics out of a politically motivated report written by a politically motivated organization.

  19. #19

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    Earlier in this post CuatrodeMayo made reference to the US News and World Report Best Hospitals Report 2006. This is another example of a non-scientific study being passed off as real research. The study used data from three areas to make their list; reputation, mortality, and other factors (their term not mine). The scores given for "reputation" and "other factors" come from doctor surveys.

    For "reputation" only 47% of the 3,200 doctors that were sent sureveys responded to them. This 3,200 was selected at random from 860,000 doctors on the AMA master file. The 1504 doctors that responded represent only 0.17% of the AMA doctors, but it accounts for 33% of the final score, and the AMA is just one of several Medical assoications.

    For the "other factors" ranking, so few hospitals responded that they had to fill in the gaps with surveys from 2003. I'm not sure why they used 2003 and not 2004 or 2005. To further skew the numbers the ranking of "other factors" also came from the same doctor survey reviewed above. We already know that only 0.17% of AMA doctors were used. This now means that 67% of the score came from a handful of doctors with enough time to fill out surveys.

    In my opinion the only category that even makes sense in the whole "study" is the mortality rate but it used data from 2003, 2004, and 2005. But once again the raw data had to be manipulated based on a subjective ranking criteria called "severity". The more sever a patient was ranked the less impact that patient had on the mortality rate. In other words, one death doesn't necessarly equal another death.

    At the end of the day it all seems like a bunch of made-up excriment to me and since we don't get to see the whole process who knows if the rules are change midstream to get the desired outcome.

  20. #20

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    It's a darn conspiracy to make the red states look bad right?
    No, it's a conspiracy of bad research and shoddy journalism under the heading of "scientific research." Oklahoma just happens to be an unfortunate bystander.

    -soonerdave

  21. #21

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    I think we need to live healther.
    Stop blaming others when you can't say no to a double whatever this or a supersize that.
    And not everything is govertment driven.
    Good lord sometimes theres no devil behind it.
    I think responsiblility should be the thing we need to changed, or indeed challenged ourselves.

  22. #22

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    Okla. #47 of 50 in overall health.

    I am sure that this is more biased information against our great state of Ok. Remeber you can't trust or believe any of this information.

    NewsOK: We can blame food, smoking for bad rating

    Tue November 6, 2007
    We can blame food, smoking for bad rating

    Top 5 states: 1-Vermont, 2-Minnesota, 3-Hawaii, 4-New Hampshire,
    5-Connecticut

    Bottom 5 states:
    46-Tennessee,
    47-Oklahoma,
    48-Arkansas,
    49-Louisiana,
    50-Mississippi


    Staff Writer
    Oklahomans eat too much, smoke too much and too often die from heart disease, researchers say, and only three states fared worse in a United Health Foundation state-by-state study of residents' health released on Monday.

    In overall health for 2007, Oklahoma ranked 47th-worst, ahead of only Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi. Top-ranked states were Vermont, Minnesota, Hawaii, New Hampshire and Connecticut. Oklahoma dropped from 44th in 2006.

    Oklahoma improved the least since 1990, and has only raised its overall score minimally since 1990 while the other states did better, according to the foundation's report.

    Oklahoma ranked worst in the nation in cardiovascular deaths and 47th worst in prevalence of smoking, according to the report, "A Call to Action for People and Their Communities.”

    In specific health categories, 25 percent of Oklahomans are listed as smokers and 29 percent of residents are considered obese.

    "Since 1990, the prevalence of obesity increased from 11.6 percent to 29 percent,” noted the foundation's report about Oklahomans.

    Obesity is defined as "an excessive accumulation of body fat, usually caused by the consumption of more calories than the body can use. The excess calories are then stored as fat.”

    "This report is very disappointing,” said Pam Troup, a member of the executive committee of Central Oklahoma Turning Point, a health improvement initiative. "Despite many education programs, we're just not seeing changes in lifestyle behaviors. The best thing that could be done in Oklahoma would be for people to stop smoking and stop using all tobacco products.”

    Oklahoma also was cited for limited access to primary-care physicians. That contributed to the state's low ranking, according to the national report.

    Some 19 percent of Oklahomans lack health insurance and 21 percent of children live in poverty, the report stated.


    What's the reaction?
    In reacting to the report, public health authorities said several factors in the report aren't within their realm of control. The United Health Foundation's assessment also included measures of economic and social conditions that can affect health outcomes.
    "Certainly, we are most disappointed that our state health status ranking has dropped,” Dr. Mike Crutcher, commissioner of the Oklahoma Health Department, said Monday.

    "In the past year, Oklahoma has experienced some noteworthy achievements that we felt should have improved our state's health ranking.”

    Crutcher said Oklahoma's immunization coverage for children from 19 to 35 months has improved from 44th to 25th in the nation — with 80.4 percent of these children now fully immunized against 10 diseases including polio and hepatitis B.

    Other successes include a reduction in the state's infectious-disease rate, which has decreased by 60 percent since 1990.

    Similarly, Oklahoma's smoking prevalence has decreased by 24 percent since 1990, although the annual rate has remained at about 25 percent since 2000, he said.

    "Numerous organizations and initiatives — including the ‘Strong and Healthy Oklahoma' initiative and the Turning Point and Fit Kids coalitions — are working together throughout the state toward the common goal of achieving positive health changes,” Crutcher said.

    "While we are disappointed in the new state health ranking, we are also even more determined to confront — and overcome — those challenges keeping our state from achieving significant health improvements,” Crutcher said.


    How one state improved
    New Mexico had a 4.5 percent increase in its health status over last year, and was ranked 38th in the report.
    "We have doubled the number of school-based health centers across New Mexico, increasing students' access to free primary and behavioral health care in their schools,” said Deborah Busemeyer, spokeswoman for the New Mexico Health Department.

    "We have expanded insurance coverage for business owners, workers, people with disabilities and every child up to age 12,” she said. "We have also created an ‘obesity interagency' to help state agencies collaborate.”

    Officials with the Oklahoma Academy of Family Physicians said they are attempting to increase the number of general practice doctors in the state.

    "Our efforts at the University of Oklahoma College of Medicine campus include introducing medical students to family medicine through preceptor programs with family physicians, monthly lectures relating to primary care, and community-outreach activities including hands-on clinics for the homeless and uninsured patients,” said Sam Blackstock, academy executive vice president.

    "We are also even more determined to confront — and overcome — those challenges keeping our state from achieving significant health improvements.”

    Dr. Mike Crutcher, health commissioner
    NewsOK: We can blame food, smoking for bad rating

  23. Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    It baffles me how many people of my generation smoke despite being more than well educated on the dangers of it.

  24. Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    Quote Originally Posted by jbrown84 View Post
    It baffles me how many people of my generation smoke despite being more than well educated on the dangers of it.
    It makes you look cool.



    kidding

  25. #25

    Default Re: Oklahoma Ranks DEAD Last in Health Care!!

    So, Oklahoma is #47 in overall health.

    okclee, what do you want our state's health care system to do to make Oklahoma healthier?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 30 best places to work in Oklahoma
    By metro in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 07-21-2008, 12:20 PM
  2. 100 Oklahoma Foods to try before you die
    By metro in forum General Food & Drink Topics
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 12-10-2007, 09:40 AM
  3. Your OKC City Council
    By Keith in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-18-2007, 06:54 AM
  4. U.S. lags behind other nations in health care
    By PUGalicious in forum Current Events & Open Topic
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-04-2005, 08:50 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO