Group Health trolling cyberspace to learn what patients think

E-mails between doctors and patients are de rigueur at Group Health Cooperative.

But there's another way the two sides keep in touch: via blogs and online forums.

Whether people are raving or ranting about Group Health in cyberspace, chances are the Seattle health co-op will know about it — and sometimes even respond.

When one member fumed in an online newspaper forum that Group Health wouldn't authorize a colonoscopy, Dr. David Grossman, its director of cancer screening, supplied a phone number to schedule an appointment.

When commentators on the cancer blog at www.assertivepatient.com were debating whether e-mail reminders from physicians constitute spam, Dr. Matt Handley, a Group Health family practitioner, weighed in to note that Group Health sends e-mails only for vital reasons.

As the health-care industry marches toward greater transparency on cost and quality, countless patients are logging on to lament, praise and swap advice on topics ranging from surly nurses to insurance options to unconventional therapies.

Group Health has come to accept — if not always embrace — these blogs and other Web sites as the cyberspace version of office water coolers. A national leader in medical-information technology, Group Health recognized early that patients don't rely solely on physicians to inform themselves, said Dr. Ted Eytan, medical director of health informatics and Web services.

Group Health monitors cyber chatter with more vigilance than most major health plans in Washington. A staff member compiles a daily roundup of postings that mention the co-op. Each Web site is ranked by traffic volume. (Major news sources such as CNN.com are on the A list, while obscure blogs rate a C.) Each comment is rated for tone: negative ("Shame on you, Group Health"); positive ("I feel like a human being here, not a number"); neutral; or mixed.

It's rare that Group Health feels compelled to respond to misleading or erroneous postings, said Mike Foley, a spokesman for the nonprofit co-op. But it happens.

When Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN's chief medical correspondent, seemed to imply on his blog last August that a Group Health medical study was tainted by drug-company money, his musings elicited a quick denial from Dr. Eric Larson, one of the paper's authors, from Group Health Center for Health Studies.

Regence BlueShield of Washington also tracks blogs for company news but has never responded directly, said spokeswoman Lee Therriault.

Unlike Group Health, Regence is trying to directly encourage some of that person-to-person exchange. For more than a year it has hosted a members-only community bulletin on www.myRegence.com. And this spring, Regence began allowing members to publicly grade their doctors and their practices.

Though every review and posting is checked by someone at Regence, Therriault said editorial interference is minimal. So an anonymous member who started a thread about a billing dispute under the heading "Crooked Regence" was left undisturbed, though he drew withering rebuttals from other members.

"It's free speech," Therriault said. "A lot of it is self-policing."

Eytan, the Group Health physician, goes as far as to believe that blogs could offer direct clinical benefits. Eytan has read patients' personal blogs, in which, he said, they reveal information they never would share with their doctors.

If doctors can find a way to harness such hidden insights, they can better tackle the root causes of ailments, Eytan said. He added that doctors ought to welcome patients who seek health information elsewhere — even if they sometimes consult dubious sources.

Eytan, 39, is of the generation who trained in medicine during the AIDS era, an epidemic whose patients were often just as keenly interested in their diseases as their doctors were. By encouraging patients to become informed, he said, physicians can serve as the trusted final word.

"That puts pressure on us in a good way," he said.

Kyung Song: 206-464-2423 or ksong@seattletimes.com