By Robin Strongin. Over the next several weeks Disruptive Women will be blogging about the various aspects of patient advocacy.  Then in September, we will disseminate an e-Book on the topic.  To get ready for this series, I invite your input; think about what patient advocacy means to you and share your stories with us. Please comment on this post to let us know what you think about the topic– its level of importance in health care and any questions you may have or experiences you are comfortable sharing.I hope you will join us in this very important dialogue.

By Val Jones. I received this press release today and was depressed by the prevalence of meritless lawsuits in this country. Most physicians (95%) are sued at some point in their careers, and as many as 90% of these suits are found to be meritless. If that doesn’t make you want to quit practicing medicine, I don’t know what does.

This kind of litigious climate definitely adds to my stress levels — and makes me fearful of caring for very sick and fragile patients who are likely to have poor outcomes, regardless of what I do. Many of my colleagues practice medicine with one eye always looking over their shoulder, wondering when that one bad apple will take them to court in an attempt at a financial windfall.

In Canada, those who bring frivolous lawsuits to court are responsible for all legal costs. I’d be in favor of having a similar process here to chill the medical malpractice frenzy that’s raising costs and driving physicians out of clinical medicine. Cases of true medical malpractice should be punished and patients’ rights protected — but when 90% of lawsuits are bogus, it’s time to fight back.

Here’s the AMA’s press release:

WASHINGTON – A new report from the American Medical Association (AMA) paints a bleak picture of physicians’ experiences with medical liability claims and bolsters the case for national and state level reform. A key finding from the report is that, among physicians surveyed by the AMA, there was an average of 95 medical liability claims filed for every 100 physicians, almost one per physician.

The report has data not available anywhere else, including information on medical liability claims’ impact by age, gender and practice arrangement for physicians. Highlights in the report include:

- Nearly 61 percent of physicians age 55 and over have been sued.There is wide variation in the impact of liability claims between specialties. 

- The number of claims per 100 physicians was more than five times greater for general surgeons and obstetricians/gynecologists than it was for pediatricians and psychiatrists.

- Before they reach the age of 40, more than 50 percent of obstetricians/gynecologists have already been sued.

- Ninety percent of general surgeons age 55 and over have been sued.

“Even though the vast majority of claims are dropped or decided in favor of physicians, the understandable fear of meritless lawsuits can influence what specialty of medicine physicians practice, where they practice and when they retire,” said AMA Immediate Past-President J. James Rohack, M.D. “This litigious climate hurts patients’ access to physician care at a time when the nation is working to reduce unnecessary health care costs.”

The number of medical liability claims is not an indication of the frequency of medical error, as the physician prevails 90 percent of the time in cases that go to trial. While 65 percent of claims are dropped or dismissed, they are not cost-free. Average defense costs per claim range from a low of over $22,000 among claims that are dropped or dismissed to a high of over $100,000 for cases that go to trial. This leads to increased costs for physicians and patients.

“The AMA supports proven medical liability reforms to lower health care costs and keep physicians caring for patients,” said Dr. Rohack. “The findings in this report validate the need for national and state medical liability reform to rein in our out-of-control system where lawsuits are a matter of when, not if, for physicians.”

The report includes data from the AMA’s 2007-2008 Physician Practice Information survey of patient care physicians and other sources.

Originally posted on Better Health  by Disruptive Women Val Jones on August 3rd.

With Disruptive Women in Health Care Real Women on Health! Reveals Power of Patient Advocacy

Real Women on Health!, the multi-channel platform and online community for women, reveals the power of patient advocacy with a leading healthcare blog community, Disruptive Women in Health Care. The two online media forces have invited key influencers from the Health 2.0 movement for a three-part call-in, live on-line radio series starting in August.

The Real Women on Health! online radio show will allow experts to share their ideas on how to use technology to promote collaboration between patients, their caregivers and medical professionals. The shows will feature Indu Subaiya, co-founder of Health 2.0, Jane Sarasohn-Kahn, health economist, principal of THINK-Health, Trisha Torrey, Guide to Patent Empowerment, Regina Holliday, medical advocate and muralist and several others. “We’re excited to bring together these women innovators to share their visions of Health 2.0 and what it means for healthcare’s stakeholders – which should be every one of us,” says Robin Strongin, founder of Disruptive Women in Health Care and President and CEO, Amplify Public Affairs.

Innovative companies and entrepreneurs in Health 2.0 are developing the most effective tools and approaches to healthcare in this new century, and are looking for new ideas from all sources. “We know how important collaboration and communications are to transforming healthcare today”, says Kelley Connors, founder of Real Women on Health! and President of KC Healthcare Communications LLC. “Listeners who call in will have the chance ask questions, and share their ideas as well – it’s all about sparking a dialogue on patient advocacy,” she added.

Topics and guests include:

Tuesday, August 3rd 12:00pm – 1:00pm EST: Topic: How ‘Health 2.0’ is Evolving and Why You Should Care.” Featured guests, Indu Subaiya, co-founder of Health 2.0, a leading showcase where healthcare transformers share news and ideas around technology and patient communities, and Jane Sarasohn-Kahn, health economist, principal of THINK-Health and founder of one of the most influential blogs in healthcare, Health Populi.

Thursday, August 5th 12:00pm – 1:00pm EST: Topic: “Patient Empowerment: How to be Your Own Best Advocate.” Featured guests, Trisha Torrey, Guide to Patent Empowerment, About.com and quoted in this month’s “O” Magazine, and Regina Holliday, medical advocate and muralist, painter of “73 cents,” a depiction of challenges she faced to acquire her late husband’s medical records as he struggled with cancer (“73 Cents” also cover of British Medical Journal 9/09).

Later in the month, the show will also explore how healthcare professionals are using social media to enhance communications with patients.

There are two ways to listen and/or participate in what will be fascinating conversations — listen online at www.blogtalkradio.com/realwomenonhealth or call toll-free (646) 929-2625.

For more information on this series or how to sponsor shows, please contact Cassie Holm, cassie@realwomenonhealth.com or call 201-417-1309.

By Pamela Cipriano. On July 13, 2010, the clock started running for eligible providers, hospitals, and critical access hospitals, to become meaningful users of certified electronic health records (EHR). Under the direction of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, together with the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) released the final rules that lay out the first two years of requirements for eligible professionals to qualify for incentive payments included in provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 through the HITECH act (Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health).  View the press conference led by Secretary Sebelius.   (Disruptive Woman Regina Holliday, spoke at the press conference)

Seven months and 2000+ professional and public comments later, the final rules lay out a three phase graduated approach of requirements for demonstrating meaningful use of certified EHRs.  Since not one stakeholder group is wholly enamored with the rules, they are more than likely equitable and balanced.  Listening to the feedback, the ONC made a number of changes from the proposed to the final rules, taking into account concerns about the speed and scope of implementation of criteria to qualify as a meaningful user.  Groups across the industry gave faint praise as they acknowledged the greater flexibility in the final rules and an easing of some of the requirements.  The phased approach lays out the goal for Stage 1 as capture of data in coded format, Stage 2 exchange of information with emphasis on guiding and supporting care processes and coordination, and Stage 3 improving outcomes by focusing on decision support with improved access to comprehensive patient data.

With quality at stake, the meaningful use incentives tie payments to achieving advances in health care processes and outcomes.  The payments are intended to help accelerate use of HIT. Fortunately there is already broad agreement that populating data into EHRs, using electronic prescribing, reviewing and sharing data across providers and settings, and reporting on quality measures has a positive effect on care.  Dr. Don Berwick, newly appointed Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, emphasized that the new rules define the use of EHRs that is “meaningful to care and to people,” emphasizing the direct improvement in patient safety, transparency, and access to data resulting in better, safer, and more reliable care for everyone.  Certified EHRs help providers know more about their patients, make better informed decisions, and reduce costs of care.  Electronic systems can reduce potential for errors, and enable consumers to work with their providers to coordinate and manage their care.     (more…)

By Robin Strongin. It didn’t receive much attention in the context of oil wells being capped and financial services legislation being passed, but the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) took a step last week that could make a profound difference for Americans who live in rural parts of the country.

The FCC voted unanimously to have the federal government pay a greater share of broadband Internet costs for rural health care providers, and the commission also expressed its intent to subsidize the construction of broadband networks.

Why is this important?  Over the past 25 years, according to the Center for Health Transformation, over 500 rural hospitals have shuttered their facilities.  And, while 25 percent of the U.S. population lives in rural areas, only about one in ten doctors base their practices in sparsely populated areas, creating a serious physician shortage.  For many, it’s an economic hardship to drive a few hundred miles to see a specialist.  Broadband access can bridge those distances and help physicians and rural patients share vital information.

The FCC has a $400 million annual spending cap for rural health care telecommunications programs, but it wasn’t spending all of that money.  So, now it will pay 50 percent of monthly broadband charges for eligible health providers, instead of 25 percent.

It’s not a lot of dollars in the grand scheme of federal outlays, but if it can help bring quality health care closer to those living in America’s wide open spaces, it’s one of our nation’s better investments.

By Stephanie Mensh. During the next week or so, various Federal, state, and local government agencies as well as consumer organizations will be celebrating the 20^th anniversary of the landmark legislation, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), signed into law on July 26, 1990. 

My husband suffered a stroke that resulted in speech and mobility impairments around the time that the ADA became law.  The ADA continues to help my husband and family by increasing awareness and accessibility for people with disabilities to fully participate in our community, to go to school, work, shop, movie theaters, restaurants, and hotels, to use public transportation, to access hospitals and health care, and to have a place to call “home.”

The ADA rights also extend to caregivers of people with disabilities.  Balancing the demands of a full-time job and taking care of a family member with a disability or chronic illness can be difficult, even with the most understanding employer. Under ADA caregivers, male or female, are protected from job discrimination resulting from real or perceived family commitments. (more…)

By Robin Strongin. When the Obama Administration announced the new regulations expanding preventive care, ensuring that essential screenings and tests would be covered without co-pays for deductibles, my first thought was that this may be one of the most important provisions of health reform in terms of improving the overall health and well-being of the American people.

My second thought concerned forests, falling trees and sounds we may or may not hear.

The history of health care in the United States is, in large part, defined by sound policies and vital programs that are not accompanied by effective outreach to  the patients and consumers who have the most to gain from these innovations.  Thus, new provisions expanding preventive coverage have the potential to be like the proverbial tree falling in an empty forest.  If we don’t do a good job letting people know these services are more accessible, will they take advantage of them?

I think of the millions of people who are eligible for Medicaid or for Children’s Health Insurance Programs who aren’t enrolled.

I think of the widespread confusion that existed in the early days of the Medicare Part D prescription drug program until several organizations stepped in to conduct coast-to-coast information sessions with seniors.

And I think of the story that just appeared in the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/15/health/15chen.html?_r=2&ref=health&pagewanted=print) regarding the growth in usage of the “medical home” model for health care.  (I prefer the term health home, but that’s for another post.) As Dr. Pauine Chen pointed out in the Times, empirical evidence is showing that the medical/health home – shorthand for greater care coordination between the patient’s primary care physician, specialists and other health care professionals – is working.  A demonstration project sponsored by the American Academy of Family Physicians showed that the new model was improving quality of care, efficiency of operations and physicians’ job satisfaction.

But patients hated it, because no one bothered explaining to them why their one-on-one relationship with their health provider was being replaced by a one-in-three or one-in-four relationship with multiple providers, even if it resulted in better care.

And, thus, does this new innovation in health care delivery fall within the proud history of U.S. health care in which great ideas are not linked with communication to the patient.

As health reform is implemented, both the public and private sectors need to do better, beginning with outreach to let people know about the new preventive care coverage and, more importantly, to ensure that Medicaid expansion and the new subsidies to help make private health insurance more affordable affect the people for whom they are intended.

By Glenna Crooks. On Sunday July 4, HealthDay News reported on a June 30 Environmental Health Perspectives item that the health benefits of cycling in an urban environment outweigh the risks. Huh? I asked myself.

I live in Center City Philadelphia and far too many cyclists – I’ll go out on a limb and say a majority – are a menace. They ride on pedestrian walkways, sometimes IPod hearing-impaired, weaving through pedestrians. They ride on the wrong side of the roads, the wrong way down one-way streets and weave between traffic lanes. They do not stop for red lights. In fact, some bikes don’t have brakes.

I’ve been nearly hit twice by cyclists running red lights, coming from between trucks and therefore not visible to a pedestrian until they appear suddenly, inches away. And, at 6:10 AM several months ago, while taking a work-out jog on a paved path along the Schuylkill River with my trainer Morris (March Man of the Month), was rammed from behind by a cyclist. Though it was clearly past dawn, he did not see me, perhaps because his head was down to lower the drag created by an upright body, going fast on a path that is frequented by walkers of all ages.

The accident has cost me nearly $500 a month in out-of-pocket expenses since, to address the back pain it caused. I’m lucky, though. Around that same time two pedestrians were killed in my neighborhood by cyclists.

I had visions – no, nightmares – of public policymakers seeing this report and encouraging more cycling in the US. Who on earth would believe that cycling was safe, I wondered? How could I change their minds? I had to read beyond the first sentence to understand. (more…)

By Robin Strongin. Republicans on Capitol Hill are still steaming over President Obama’s decision to install Dr. Donald Berwick as administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services via a recess appointment (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39759.html), bypassing the normal confirmation process which would have included a hearing before the Senate Finance Committee.

Now, GOP members of the Finance Committee are insisting, in a letter to committee chairman Max Baucus (D-MT), that a hearing should take place anyway.  In their letter, they argue that the lack of such a forum “casts a shadow over (Berwick’s) legitimacy and authority to serve as administrator during a critical time for CMS.”

That rhetoric may be overhyped.  After all, Berwick is hardly the first nominee, Democratic or Republican, to take office by virtue of a recess appointment.

Nonetheless, there is a legitimate point here that a hearing needs to take place.  But, while Senate Republicans want to grill Berwick on his now-infamous speech that some interpret as extolling the virtues of Britain’s National Health Service, I believe there is a far more compelling reason for him to face congressional inquisitors.

By 2014, approximately 30 million now-uninsured Americans are going to be joining the ranks of those with health coverage and, in so doing, significantly increasing the utilization of health services.  As many analysts have pointed out, if this utilization escalation happens within our current health care system, it’s reasonable to expect health costs to shoot skyward without a commensurate increase in quality and cost-effectiveness. (more…)

By Mary Grealy.  An organization of health industry chief executives today applauded federal regulators for being responsive to the concerns of hospitals and physicians in constructing the final “meaningful use” regulations that will determine the allocation of health information technology (HIT) incentive funds.  But, said the president of the Healthcare Leadership Council (HLC), the newly-released rules leave some critical issues still unaddressed.

HLC president Mary R. Grealy said that, even though her organization was still analyzing the regulations, “it’s clear that federal regulators paid close attention to the more than 2,000 comments they received on the proposed rule, and that they have been responsive to concerns that the initial regulations placed the “meaningful use” bar so unrealistically high that the health technology revolution would have been slowed instead of accelerated.”

The “meaningful use” regulations establish standards that health providers must meet in order to qualify for a share of the more than $27 billion authorized by Congress in last year’s economic stimulus legislation.

The Healthcare Leadership Council is a coalition of chief executives from all sectors of American healthcare.

Ms. Grealy said, “An example of this responsiveness is seen in the fact that the rules no longer require that, in the initial stage of implementation, all of a health provider’s administrative transactions must be included in an electronic health record.  That simply wasn’t realistic.  Those requirements are now in Phase 2 of implementation, which is achievable.”

She said, though, that legitimate concerns remain.  For example, the regulations should consider each campus of a multi-campus hospital system as a separate entity in qualifying for HIT incentive payments.  And, she said, health providers who have built and succeeded with their own information technology systems should be grandfathered into the universe of successful “meaningful use” qualifiers, but that doesn’t appear to be the case based on an initial review of the rules released today.

Nonetheless, Ms. Grealy said, “we’re seeing important progress with these regulations.  Clearly, the administration saw there was a gap between the theoretical standards they initially wanted to apply and the real-world challenges that physicians and hospitals face in achieving HIT advancement.   We all want the benefits that come from information technology – enhanced patient safety, more cost-efficient operations, greater use of evidence-based medicine – but to make strides forward, regulators and providers need to be moving at a coordinated pace.”

Orignially posted on Prognosis: A Healthcare Blog on July 13th

By Rozalynn Goodwin. Yes, I said “cooties.”  You remember that childhood imaginary disease believed to spread through contact with those infected or worse, those of the opposite sex.  The cooties epidemic has spread to Washington, DC, and has politicians frightened to work across the aisles for the greater good.  I heard that the lesson: “They Have the Cooties” takes up most of the first day of orientation for newly elected congressmen and senators.  This class perfects neophytes’ skills in murdering any attempts for bipartisanship.

Cooties can be deadly for a politician.  Just look at SC’s latest casualty, outgoing Congressman Bob Inglis.  His independent thinking and willingness to sometimes side with the other party were clear symptoms that he had been infected, and now he’s being sent home to be quarantined.  Senator Lindsey Graham’s case of the cooties is thought by some to be in the advanced stages.

Cooties are not only taking out politicians who think for themselves and for the good of America.  Cooties are also killing good policy.  The six-month extension of the FMAP (Federal Medical Assistance Percentage) increase appears to be the latest victim.  This temporary fiscal relief for states was first provided through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) back in February 2009 to prevent the decimation of state Medicaid programs at a time of rising unemployment and increasing Medicaid rolls.  This relief runs out the end of 2010 (right in the middle of most states’ fiscal years), and therefore produces a significant fiscal problem for state budgets.  Just last week, several governors from across the nation gathered in DC to lobby for this extension.  Guess whose governor was not there…

Earlier this year, it was widely assumed that this extension was a done deal, but Congress has been punked into inaction by some primary election results across the country that some believe reflect voters’ frustration with government spending.

Now don’t get me wrong.  I understand the need to be conservative in tough economic times, but I also understand the need to stimulate the economy and give our most economically vulnerable a helping hand.  It’s funny how we can bail out financial institutions and their wealthy executives, and turn a deaf ear to those truly suffering.

If FMAP is not extended, not only will SC’s disabled, very poor and senior citizens lose access to health care services, our state’s struggling economy will lose as well.  SC stands to lose over $200 million in federal dollars that could help patch our frail Medicaid budget and stimulate our economy with high-paying healthcare jobs and the accompanying exchange of goods and services.  (more…)

By Glenna Crooks. Rittenhouse Square in Philly, a holiday weekend and great weather made for the perfect place for light reading this weekend. I got magazines with the intention of doing just that – and did. It was great to be outside on warm, breezy days.

However, my mood soured about half way into Spirituality&Health, reading an article about a possible new cancer therapy.

It describes the observations of Mamdooh Ghoneum, PhD: cancer cells are attracted to, ‘eat’ heat-killed baker’s yeast and then die. That’s good news. It happens in labs and in mice, who apparently suffer no side effects. That’s good news, too. Approval for testing in other animals is pending. I hope he gets it. We need progress in the healing of people with cancer.

Why the sour mood? Dr. Ghoneum is hero enough for making the observation and following through with studies. He’ll be all the more heroic if he continues and learns from whatever comes next.

The article does not stop with the ‘scientist vs disease’ heroic tale, however. It goes further to paint an unfortunate and ill-informed, biased contrast – between an altruistic pioneer using his personal savings and fund raising efforts to find a cure vs a greedy, patent-dependent industry hungry to return to shareholders the $800M – $2B quoted as the cost of developing a medicine. It asserts that industry would never develop a ‘natural’ product, saying: “Nowadays, a cancer cure that is all natural, non-toxic, simple to administer and inexpensive to produce has become an economic non-starter.”

Drug Development and Approval. Dr. Ghoneum is currently at the drug ‘research’ phase. This is the easy part. Get past animal research and the ‘development’ phase begins. Move into humans and the costs pile up fast – so do the failures. He’ll face institutional review boards, numerous negotiations with FDA over appropriate surrogate markers and end points, challenges of getting patients into clinical trials, careful management of clinical research sites and exquisite documentation at every stage. This is the phase that washes out all but 1-2 of every 10,000 drugs discovered.

Add to that, this is a yeast product – a biological – which means he’ll have to satisfy FDA that there is ‘batch to batch’ consistency in the product as he scales up for clinical studies and, if the product succeeds, eventual market use.

Since he intends to develop a treatment safe, effective and affordable enough for poor people around the world, he will also face regulatory requirements, and perhaps clinical trials, in those nations as well.   (more…)

By Robin Strongin. No such thing as a summer vacation for those Inside the Beltway tasked with implementing and explaining health reform.

In case you were looking for some summer-time reading, the new insurance portal, http://www.healthcare.gov/ just launched (a few hours ahead of its July 1 deadline).  You can work your way through 500 pages of content and state-by-state listings of more than 5,500 open health insurance products.

And if that’s not enough to quench your health reform thirst, The new National Prevention, Health Promotion and Public Health Council, created by the Affordable Care Act, submitted its first status report to Congress on July 1.

Chaired by Surgeon General Regina Benjamin and composed of senior government officials across federal departments and agencies, the Council is charged with elevating and coordinating prevention activities and designing a focused strategy across federal departments to prevent disease and promote the nation’s health. The report submitted is the Council’s first, and an early step in the Administration’s development of a first-ever National Prevention and Health Promotion strategy. The Strategy’s impact will be significant because it will take a community health approach to prevention and well-being—identifying and prioritizing actions across government and between the public and private sectors. Both the forthcoming Strategy and the ongoing work of the new Council present a historic opportunity to bring prevention and wellness to the forefront of the nation’s efforts to improve the health status of all Americans.

Read the Council’s report.

Read the Fact Sheet.

By Joy Burwell

You’re Invited to

“Solutions To Scale: Proven Health Care Models for Primetime”

 Wednesday, June 30, 2010

 9:00 – 11:30 am

Breakfast will be served at 8:30 am

Kaiser Family Foundation

Barbara Jordan Conference Center

1330 G Street, NW

Washington, DC 20004

 Raise the Voice, a program of the American Academy of Nursing supported by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, showcases the work of “Edge Runners” – nurse researchers and experts who have developed proven care models and interventions that demonstrate significantly improved clinical outcomes and cost savings.  The Edge Runners will share their experiences to highlight what does and does not work for consideration by federal and state agencies during health care implementation.

Welcome:

• Diana J. Mason, PhD, RN, FAAN, Editor-in-Chief Emeritus, American Journal of Nursing
• The Honorable Robert Borski

Opening Remarks:

• Ken Thorpe, PhD, Department of Health Policy and Management, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University

Panel One:

• Tina Johnson, CNM, MS, Practicing Nurse Midwife
• Tine Hansen-Turton, MGA, JD, CEO, National Nursing Centers Consortium, Executive Director, Convenient Care Association, Raise the Voice Edge Runner
• Eileen M. Sullivan-Marx, PhD, CRNP, FAAN, Advisor, Living Independently For Elders (LIFE), Raise the Voice Edge Runner
• Deirdre Baggot, BSN, MBA, Administrator for Cardiac and Vascular Services, Exempla Saint Joseph Hospital, CMS ACE Demonstration Site for Bundling Payments
• Sandra Haldane, BSN, MS, RN, Chief Nurse, Indian Health Service

Panel Two:

• Randall Krakauer, MD, FACP, FACR, Head of Medicare Medical Management, Aetna
• Susan Reinhard, PhD, RN, FAAN, Senior Vice President, AARP Public Policy Institute, Chief Strategist, Center to Champion Nursing In America
• Matt Salo, Director Health and Human Services Committee, National Governors Association

Moderator:

• Scott Hensley, National Public Radio

RSVP: Joy Burwell 202-263-2971 or jburwell@amplifypublicaffairs.net

Sponsored by the American Academy of Nursing’s Raise the Voice Campaign. Raise the Voice is supported by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

By Robin Strongin. This was a busy week in women’s health—an issue of global importance. On June 7th, Women Deliver 2010, the largest meeting on global maternal health in the last ten years, kicked off in Washington, DC. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon delivered opening remarks and US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton addressed participants via video. The conference offered an opportunity to take stock of progress that has been made in improving global maternal health while assessing the challenges that remain.

Women Deliver 2010 highlighted achievements in reducing maternal mortality, breakthroughs in reproductive technology, the role of women’s health in development, and remaining obstacles to improving maternal health around the world. The conference’s 3,000 participants, including heads of state, ministers of health and leading maternal health advocates, called on governments, donors, and multi-lateral organizations to increase their financial commitments to women and girls. For more information on Women Deliver, visit: www.womendeliver.org and to watch replays of the presentations, click here: www.womendeliver.org/webcast.

During the conference, Population Action International launched a new documentary, Empty Handed: Responding to the Demand for Contraceptives. WATCH THE TRAILER

Empty Handed Advocacy Short from Population Action International on Vimeo.

Around the world, more than 215 million women lack access to basic contraception. Empty Handed tells the story of women’s lack of access to reproductive health supplies (contraceptives and condoms) in sub-Saharan Africa, and its impact on their lives. The film documents the challenges at each level of the reproductive health supply chain and identifies key areas of improvement.

Empty Handed was shot in Uganda in March 2010 by PAI filmmaker Nathan Golon with support from the Reproductive Health Supplies Coalition.